The Twelve Tribes
James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting, James 1:1.
The above verse is the normal starting place for placing the book of James outside of doctrine intended for local churches today. By most (not all) of the reasoning I hear on excluding James from current doctrinal consideration as it should apply to local churches, this verse is front and center. They see the opening verse as a fulfillment of the Apostle Paul's statement in Galatians 2:9; And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.
As we saw in the last post just because Paul and the other apostles divided their spheres of influence doesn't mean that each preached a gospel so distinct that it could not avail if preached to the wrong group. In the sense that James had a commission and a burden for his fellow Jews, it makes perfect sense that he would address a letter to them.
I have heard it reasoned that since no one knew where ten of the tribes of Israel were, that James's reference to them must be for the future. They reason that as proof that it is a book written for saints in the great tribulation. Yes, ten tribes had lost their identities. Those things happened when poor records were kept. That is what was taking place in Ezra 2:62,63. The people were there but could not prove their identities.
Yet, the Apostle Paul assumed that they were still around. He spoke of them to King Agrippa. Unto which promise our twelve tribes, instantly serving God day and night, hope to come. For which hope's sake, king Agrippa, I am accused of the Jews, Acts 26:27. He spoke of them in the present tense. They were there, mingled in the population. The Holy Ghost knew who they were and could identify them. Look at Anna's tribe; And there was one Anna, a prophetess, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Aser, Luke 2:36.
When I read James, I know that I am not one of the twelve tribes. I also know that my name is not Timothy, but I read his two books anyway. My name is not Philemon, but I read his book. I am not from Colossea, but I read their book. I am not from Thessalonica but I read their two books. I am not from Philippi, but I read their book. My name is not Titus, but I read his book.
So, it isn't really the opening line of James that signals that it is not for us. Too many people will circle back to Galatians 2:9. "Paul was to us! James and Peter are to the Jews!" I am not such a fool as that I don't know that a Jew and a Gentile needed to be approached differently. The Apostle Paul himself said so.
1st Corinthians 9:20 And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law;
1st Corinthians 9:21 To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.
When I read a letter written specifically to Jews, I expect to find the tenor of that letter to be different than a letter written to Gentiles. I also know that these letters were written in a time of transition when some Jews and some gentiles already had salvation through believing the promises of God as they stood prior to the death burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The synagogues visited by Paul always had gentiles in them. These are people who needed a transition. The disciples of John the Baptist (who Paul identified as believing) had never heard of the Holy Ghost in Acts 19. They are just such an example.
Throughout the Apostle Paul's ministry he was on the lookout for people who needed the laying on of an Apostle's hands to make that transition. For I long to see you, that I may impart unto you some spiritual gift, to the end ye may be established, Romans 1:11. This was written by the same Apostle Paul who wrote; And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power, Colossians 2:10.
Romans 1:11 is a transition verse written in the Pauline epistles. I have enough spiritual maturity to understand that even though Paul laid hands on men to get the Holy Ghost after the time in which he had started his epistles, and even though he sought out others to imbue them with spiritual gifts, I do not need such. I am complete in Christ. I was brought to repentance, saved, born again and given a complete and perfect salvation after the death burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
I am aware that there were people to whom those graces came but were parsed out as events unfolded. Both Paul's and the other Apostles' writings deal with such people. (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.), John 7:39. There are transitions in every writer's letters.
The last great proof to those who would exclude James from being an epistle for churches today is supposed doctrinal issues. We will deal with those soon.
|
|
ADDITIONAL LEARNING/TEACHING RESOURCES
WILL BE ADDED AS WE MOVE FORWARD
PURE CAMBRIDGE 1023 - 01192023 - Wrestling a Verse - What Proof Has There Ever Been? - Fetcht, Pluckt, and Dwelt - https://conta.cc/3GW80wj
PURE CAMBRIDGE 1019 - 12152022 - According to the Scriptures - Christmas - What is the difference? - The Value of Punctuation https://conta.cc/3hy0pLP
PURE CAMBRIDGE 1004 08312022 - A Book for the People - Did Blayney Retranslate? - Fearing the Apocrypha - ww.purecambridgetext.com
time only" or "only 7 remaining!"
|
|
As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction, 2nd Peter 3:16.
As I have mentioned before, all good theology is like a three legged stool. One leg is a verse. The next leg is a reasonable explanation of that verse, and the last and vital leg is a clear demonstration from scripture that the explanation attached to the verse was used and understood by those to whom it was ascribed.
As an example, think of Matthew 16: 17-19
Matthew 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
Matthew 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
Matthew 16:19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
Those verses are central to Roman Catholic thinking. They are a starting point for teaching that Peter was the first pope and that a succession of popes would have the keys to to the kingdom of heaven. If all we had was this passage, such a theology would not be unreasonable on its face. We would have two legs of a stool. We would have a verse and we would have an explanation of that verse. Yet, if we sought for a third leg so that the stool would support us, we would come up empty.
At no time do we ever find Peter in Rome. Peter clearly gave preference to the Apostle Paul as we saw in our banner verse, 2nd Peter 3:16. When Peter erred, it wasn't made a rule in heaven, it was rebuked by the Apostle Paul, Galatians 2:11-21. In fact at no time does the Apostle Peter ever play the role given him by Roman Catholic theology. Their pet theory turns out to be a two legged stool. To sit on it requires a balancing act.
The Jehovah Witnesses use 1st Corinthians 15:50 to prove that Jesus Christ resurrected as a gas. Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption. If this was the only verse in the word of God, then their explanation of it might appear genuine. It turns out to be a pitifully unstable two legged stool. Jesus Christ himself said that he resurrected as flesh. Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have, Luke 24:39.
What about the contention that The Apostles Peter and Paul preached two different gospels?
Galatians 2:6 But of these who seemed to be somewhat, (whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth no man's person:) for they who seemed to be somewhat in conference added nothing to me:
Galatians 2:7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;
Galatians 2:9 And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.
If you or anyone else has tried to build a three legged stool that says that from this time on, the Apostle Paul only went to the gentiles and Peter only went to the Jews, you will never find your third leg. As long as scripture records, both of the apostles, both Peter and Paul continued to minister to both Jews and gentiles. Carrying the gospel to the Jews was part of Paul's commission. But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel, Acts 9:15.
Throughout the Book of Acts, the Apostle Paul always visited the Jews before he visited the gentiles, and that he did so only after the Jews in the synagogues rejected the gospel. Even after his arrest and deportation to Rome, even after the Lord came to him and assured him that he must witness in Rome, he continued to visit the Jew first and after this the gentiles. And the night following the Lord stood by him, and said, Be of good cheer, Paul: for as thou hast testified of me in Jerusalem, so must thou bear witness also at Rome, Acts 23:11.
As late as when Peter wrote 2nd Peter, he was writing to gentiles. Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, 1st Peter 1:1. Whoever he wrote to in 1st Peter is who he wrote to in 2nd Peter. This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance, 2nd Peter 3:1. They are the same people to whom the Apostle Paul wrote. And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you, 2nd Peter 3:15.
Trying to separate Peter and Paul's ministry in some sense that each preached different gospels to two divergent people in the sense that the two gospels were ineffective and void if preached to the wrong people, is a shaky two legged stool that will never find verification in scripture.
If you want to preach that because the Jews were learned in the Law of Moses and in that some of them had salvation prior to the death burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and that that made them distinctly different from the gentiles who had no such knowledge or salvation, you are in a rich field in which to preach. When Peter preached in the first few chapters of Acts, he preached to men and women who knew the laws of God. They were easily made to see their guilt and were converted by the thousands.
To preach the gospel of the circumcision differed in that the circumcision knew who the God of Israel was. They knew the penalty of sin and the severity of God. Peter brought it home to them using the sign that God gave at Pentecost, and by bringing them into condemnation by showing them who Jesus Christ was.
This is in perfect accord with Paul's gospel.
1st Timothy 1:7 Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.
1st Timothy 1:8 But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;
1st Timothy 1:9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
1st Timothy 1:10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;
1st Timothy 1:11 According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.
The Apostle Paul used the law of God to bring people under condemnation. Did he not convince his hearers on Mars Hill that idolatry (the second commandment) was sin?
Acts 17:29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.
Acts 17:30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:
Unlike the gospel of the circumcision, the gospel of the uncircumcision needed to establish the laws of God in the hearer's minds and hearts. With the circumcision, that was already done. They still needed to see that they had broken those laws and had no protection therein. Both Peter and Paul strove to bring their hearers under the condemnation of the law that they might find repentance and be justified by Christ.
When either Jew or gentile received the Gospel of Jesus Christ, their respective spirits were made one with the spirit of Jesus Christ. But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit, 1st Corinthians 6:17. Jesus Christ's spirit is in his body which sits in heaven next to the Father. It is a physical body; Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God, 1st John 4:2. It is also a spiritual body; It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body, 1st Corinthians 15:44.
Whether Jew or gentile, we are all in one body in heaven which is both a physical and a spiritual body. That is a revelation given to the Apostle Paul, but it did not start when it was revealed. It began at the cross.
Ephesians 2:14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
Ephesians 2:15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
Ephesians 2:16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:
There is no excuse on this earth for a believer who is a part of that heavenly body not to be a part of a local church which is his visible body on this earth. when you are in such a church, I hope that both the converted Jew and the converted gentile are welcome therein.
|
|
And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, Romans 1:27.
I hear a lot of comments that the Western World has become a modern Sodom and Gomorrah. Without any doubt we are beginning to experience the judgment of God upon us. It is God that turns men and nations over to sodomy. When he does so, it is done as a judgment against them or their fathers. Romans 1:26 is very clear on this; For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections. Yet, we have not quite got as low as Sodom did.
In Sodom the sin was mandatory. And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them, Genesis 19:5. The ancient Jewish historian Josephus said that there were no children left in Sodom under the age of 12. The attitude of Lot's daughters seems to back that up. And the firstborn said unto the younger, Our father is old, and there is not a man in the earth to come in unto us after the manner of all the earth, Genesis 19:31. After being raised in Sodom, they didn't know that any man other than their father still practiced natural procreation with women.
We are probably not far from the time when civil authorities or their protected mobs mandate sodomy. A child might come home from school with a note stating that, "Little Johnny wouldn't cooperate in health class today". Nevertheless, we are not there yet. We are halfway to Sodom with our backs towards God. There are few crueler things that God can turn a man or a woman over to than to turn them over to lusts of their own hearts.
Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves, Romans 1:24. We have arrived there. I mean we. A year ago, I heard a pastor who had started 5 churches in Alabama state that 72% of men in Fundamental Baptist churches respond when privately polled, that they had viewed pornography in the last 7 days. He listed it as one of the great burdens with which he had to contend.
I found that distressing and difficult to believe. As I looked into the matter, I discovered that he was all too correct. We are a mess. Pornography is ubiquitous. That means that it is universally available. Poll after poll show that the same men who regularly attend good churches also view pornorgaphy on a regular basis. This will not bring judgment upon our churches, it is the judgment, God also gave them up to uncleanness.
For a while, I was using the figure of 72% of men in our churches. A group of young men who attended a special meeting here took me aside and set me straight. The figure might be 72% when old men unfamiliar with the internet are included in the poll, but for men under the age of 50, is is almost 100%. Young men in their late 30s who had worked in the general public holding many jobs over time, and knowing hundreds of fellow workers told me that they didn't know anyone who didn't regularly look at pornography on an almost hourly basis. One young man observed that his contemporaries see it as so normal and casual that the apps are right on their phones in plain sight.
My church is small but fortunate in that we have many young men, married and single who attend regularly. For a few years many of them have met on Thursday nights and discussed the state of their souls, their common temptations, and scriptural insights. They regularly have 8-10 attendees, sometimes more. One of the pernicious temptations with which they have discussed among themselves has been pornorgaphy. It was universal among them.
A leader in the group had overcome his pornography addiction but only after he got rid of his smartphone and forswore the internet. That's right, he absolutely quit using the internet at all. A few years earlier, his wife had caught him looking at pornography and had been devastated. They worked out careful ways for her to monitor his phone and internet use to keep him away from it. About a year later, he came to her and told her that he was still viewing pornography. He had just learned better ways to hide it.
After her initial agony at the betrayal, she realized that this time it was different. He had come to her voluntarily. He is now pornogrophy free, his wife trusts him and he is helping other men. You would think that young men who never miss church, regularly read their bibles, abstain from all appearance of evil, travel to hear special preaching services, and who attend such a peer group would not have a pornography problem. As those men who sought to set me straight explained, you would be wrong to think they were free from pornography.
Breitbart News recently cited a study by the British National Health Service in which they discovered that the average child begins viewing hardcore pornography at 13 years old. 10% of children start at 9 years old. Until recently, health authorities thought that viewing pornography was harmless or even a healthy diversion. Science has caught up with the bible. The viewing of pornography is destructive.
Researchers such as Gary Wilson are discovering the destructive nature of viewing pornography. His book, Your Brain on Porn: Internet Pornography and the Emerging Science of Addiction spells out the destruction wrought. Addiction to pornography has forced the medical community to change the definition of addiction. We have learned that people are not addicted to heroin, crystal meth or crack. They are addicted to the dopamine rush that those substances give them. Pornography delivers the same rush of dopamine to the pleasure center of the brain as any addictive drug does.
If you can imagine addicts being able to get their relief without needles, without hangovers, without stealing money, and without breaking the law, you can understand pornography addiction. Wilson tells us of Chinese Websites and Social forums dedicated to men seeking freedom from porn. There are over 3 million men on these sites. Universally, they find that if they can go for 90 days without viewing porn, a few things happen.
Their ability to remember things returns. Men who view porn lose many cognitive functions, memory being the chief among them. Their attraction to their own mates returns. Their erectile dysfunction goes away. Yes, erectile dysfunction is a common malady among porn users. If you take a look at all of the advertisements out there today for pills and other devices to fix such problems, you will note that they are aimed at young people.
God made our brains to be marvelous instruments. When a person gets too much of something, our brains release a chemical to retard our desire for it. Think of your favorite cookie or candy. You know from experience that after you have eaten too many, you lose your taste for it. God did that. That chemical tamps down your desire for that particular thing. Porn users quickly learn that whatever they have been viewing loses its zing in their minds. In order to get the same level of satisfaction they must delve deeper and deeper into the perversions offered for viewing.
After a man or woman has viewed pornography for a while, they can no longer tell anyone the types of things that they have viewed. The debauchery is too vile. Because they are not injecting anything into their arms or swallowing any pills, they don't realize that they have a classic addiction that is just as addictive as heroin.
I recently heard a quotation from a young construction worker (not from church) who is in his early 20s. When one of our men was discussing porn usage with him, he stated that he would far rather watch porn and relieve himself than to lay with his girlfriend. I was assured of a couple of things. The young man's girlfriend is very pretty and willing, but that didn't entice him. His reaction is common. I have now heard it from multiple sources. Because of pornography, we are halfway to Sodom. Men are leaving the natural use of the woman. They are, lovers of their own selves, 2nd Timothy 3:2.
Wilson and many other researchers tell us that these men often view porn for hours while casually massaging their own privy members. They work to avoid spilling their seed. They keep themselves in an erotic state for extended periods of time. They become useless for procreation. They become cognitively dysfunctional and they become utterly perverted. Their wives can see a change in them as they become more distant and heartless. Our churches are full of such men. As we preach against the sexual wickedness of the world, the world has counterattacked and overthrown our own men.
Ancient Greek culture and some modern cultures such as our troops found in Afghanistan only use women for procreation. They get their pleasure through sodomy. Women are only occasionally touched and that is more of a chore than a pleasure. Our churches are now full of that same rot.
I was recently contacted by a young youth pastor from a good out of state church. He had been listening to our church website Onesoulatatime.net and had finally come to repentance and gotten saved. After rejoicing with him, I solemnly warned him to get rid of his porn. He explained that the first thing he did after getting saved, was to come to his wife with each of his devices and worked with her to make them porn free. I didn't have to ask if he used porn. He's in the age group. He was using.
It may be that out of every 100 or so young men with smartphones, internet access and private time that one of them is porn free, but that would be rare. As our respective nations crumble before the sickening onslaught of sexual deviancy, our churches have been gutted by the same.
To understand the weird unspeakable stories that we hear about as both children and adults mutilate themsleves to appear as the opposite sex, think what it must be like for a person who has practiced porn viewing since they were 9 or 10 years old. Think of what it is like after they have practiced vile habits with their friends and even relatives for a few years until their inner emotions are destroyed beyond recognition. In their agony of mind and heart and in their confusion, teachers and doctors tell them that they can be surgically adapted to their feelings.
As churches have lost their ability to reach our neighborhoods, the devil has not lost his ability to overthrow our people. If you are a porn user you need help. If you are an older pastor or church member who finds this odd and over wrought, open your eyes. Halfway to Sodom (purecambridgetext.com)
|
|
As for God, his way is perfect: the word of the LORD is tried: he is a buckler to all those that trust in him.
As I have written before, the true trial of the King James Bible is not settled in manuscript evidence, controversies as to how certain words are translated, or outdated language. It can pass those trials, often with ease. There is a never ending assault made upon its integrity. The labor of the men and women who day in and day out publish materials and supporting arguments to refute the criticisms of the King James Bible is a indeed a glorious labor and I thank God for them.
These men and women are the true champions of the faith. So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God, Romans 10:17. Attack the word of God and you attack faith itself. Defend the word of God and you defend faith itself. They cannot be separated.
The true trial of a King James Bible is the trial of life itself. When I first began reading the King James Bible, I did so with resentment. A controversy had erupted in the overseas military bible study that I attended. There was a contingent who could not abide me using my New American Standard Bible while I taught. There were others who didn't care. When I switched to the King James Bible to appease the one faction, the other faction who used multiple versions didn't care.
As I began reading and studying the King James Bible, (I had been reading other versions for two years.) I became more settled. The words meant more to me. Often, I would need to stop and parse out what the English was saying, but when I did, it had a far greater impact upon me. It made my life better. Slowly and almost imperceptibly, the conviction built within me that this was indeed the word of God.
Since then, I am often reminded of Solomon's wisdom in determining the true mother of a live baby (1st Kings 3:16-28). One group at the bible study didn't really care what version I used. They didn't care what was cut out of the bible and what wasn't. The other group cared deeply. If you apply Solomon's wisdom to the Bible debate, it doesn't take long to see who has a natural affection for the word of God and who has a mere intellectual attachment.
The ministry here in Black Creek, New York often involves taking a person or family that has fallen through all safety cracks. They suffer from the effects of addictions, sexual immorality and foolishness. We ground them in the King James Bible. Invariably, it begins to affect them. We hear changes in their speech patterns. They come in eager to hear preaching. They find victory over some of the prevailing sins that have been dragging them down and destroying their lives.
They begin to get under conviction of sin. With just one exception in my 15 plus years here, every one of these people had been run through the Romans Road a few times in their lives. They prayed without faith and received empty assurances that they were heaven bound. Because with lies ye have made the heart of the righteous sad, whom I have not made sad; and strengthened the hands of the wicked, that he should not return from his wicked way, by promising him life, Ezekiel 13:22.
It doesn't take long after their lives begin to be molded by the King James Bible that the Holy Ghost is able to give them discernment as to whether or not they are in the faith. Their lives utterly change. Children who went to bed at night listening to drunken parents now go to bed in homes rich with the songs of Zion. Marriages are healed. Slackers get jobs.
Visitors to our church are often struck by the fervency and heart that goes into the singing. They see the excitement of children greeting each other. They see men and women huddled together talking and laughing together as they wait for services. When they take a closer look, they see the tattoos that cannot be hidden. As they get to know these people they marvel at the testimonies of hopelessness cured by Jesus Christ. We inject the King James Bible into their lives and they give it a trial. It passes that trial and then puts them on trial. As they fail that trial, they see Jesus Christ hanging on a cross paying their sin debt.
I realize that churches claim a lot of conversions. What distinguishes these conversions of which I speak is that they are visible in the house of God. Their homes and lives are gloriously changed. It started by getting them to try a King James bible and then teaching them to believe it.
For those of you who labor to defend our bible, thank you. You are the true heroes of faith in the 21st century.
|
|
Inflection, with the simple word to, stresses the Priority.
By adding the simple preposition, to, an urgency, a priority, is stated!
Example,
“Harden not your hearts, as in the day of provocation…” Hebrews 3:8
-the day is just a historical reference, it’s not a priority.
“…To day if you will hear his voice…” Hebrews 3:7,15
- When? NOW! No longer a mere reference, it’s the priority!
- About 100 years ago, to day morphed into today, and we lost some of the urgency.
Again,
“Take therefore no thought for the morrow: the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself” - Mt. 6:34
- the morrow could include a distant day after this, a general look to the future.
“…which to day is, and to morrow is cast into the oven…” - Mt 6:30
- This day (now) and the very next day - the here and now - immediate!
- The to ‘inflects’ the word morrow - giving emphasis and priority.
- This inflection is now diminished as it is universally spelled tomorrow.
Again,
“And they said one to another, Go to, let us make brick….Go to, let us build us a city…” - Genesis 11:3,4
- The focus and urgency to build, for it wasn’t simply a casual suggestion: go, let us make brick - it was go to! Now! Do it now!
- The Lord states the urgency, the necessity for immediate action (11:6) then commands in kind: “Go to, let us go down, and confound their language…” (11:7).
- Modern versions change go to into a less urgent and opposite directional come. It’s a small and subtle change that weakens the modern versions.
|
|
Wrestling a Verse
For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ, 2nd Corinthians 2:17.
It was the Apostle Paul who wrote Romans 10:13, For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. He did not intend it as an instruction in soul winning and he never used it as such. In fact, no one in the bible ever did. Search as you may. Search each and every occurrence where the Apostle Paul preached the gospel to unbelievers. He never used the "Romans Road" to lead anyone to Christ.
In Acts 16:30 he was directly asked, what must I do to be saved?. Paul did not tell him to "call upon the name of the Lord". He told him to "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ". A person cannot "call upon the name of the Lord" until they have believed. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?, Romans 10:14.
Calling upon the name of the Lord is something that a believer does. It is not something that an unbeliever does to become a believer. Imagine two groups of bedouins meeting at a desert watering hole. They are distrustful of each other. The leader of one group might ask the other group, what God do you call upon?. The best answer that could be given would be, "we call upon the name of the Lord".
And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD shall be delivered, Joel 2:32. When pestilence comes, when the enemy attacks, when plague runs through a nation; it is those who call upon the name of the Lord who find deliverance. So it was in Israel, and so it is now. Men have been calling upon the name of the Lord since Genesis 4:26. God has been delivering such men ever since.
That brings us to the word "saved". There is a knee jerk reaction in most folks that equate "saved" with the process whereby God delivers a person from sin and translates them into the Kingdom of God. Indeed, that is one example of the bible word "saved". A person who receives Jesus Christ by believing the gospel is saved. He is saved from sin. He also receives a sure hope of the future deliverance from the penalty of his sin and from going through the wrath of God. It is one of many applications of the word.
In each and every place the word "saved" is used in the word of God it means delivered. What the person is delivered from depends upon the context.
Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee, 1st Timothy 4:16.
These people are already delivered from sin. By taking heed to the doctrine and by continuing therein, they save themselves from falling away or making a mess of their lives.
2. But when he saw the wind boisterous, he was afraid; and beginning to sink, he cried, saying, Lord, save me, Matthew 14:30.
Peter is not asking here to be delivered from sin. He wants to be delivered from drowning.
3. And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed, Romans 13:11.
This verse gives us an insight into Paul's thinking. There is a salvation to come. He is speaking of the deliverance that God gives to those who call upon the name of the Lord. If you are a person who calls upon the name of the Lord, which by definition means that you have believed on him, you shall be saved. You will not be left to go through the great tribulation.
If you insist upon making the words "saved", "salvation", and "saved" to always mean "passing from death unto life", you will miss much of what the bible is saying.
Romans 10 is a chapter which defines the Apostle Paul's love for the Jews, it describes Moses's forewarnings about belief. It defines true faith as being a belief deep in the heart. It is belief that knows and trusts the the death burial of Jesus Christ. It is not a description of the mechanics of how to be saved.
If Catholic priest is asked to deliver a person from hell, he sprinkles water on him. A buddhist would teach him to meditate. A Muslim would circumcise him and teach him to pray to Allah. A Church of Christ Pastor will baptize him by immersion. 99% of Baptist preachers and their squishy brethren in Evangelicalism will get them to pray a specially worded prayer. Romans 10:13 has become a religious ceremony and is just as ineffective as any other religious ceremony.
The misapplication of Romans 10:13 has sent more people to hell in the last 50 years than almost any other form of sin out there. In times past, I have prayed with hundreds and hundreds of people while all the time enticing them to pray in accordance with the general understanding of Romans 10:13. I can find none of them in church. I can see no changed lives. But, when I look at those to whom I preached, begged God for their souls, waited for the Holy Ghost to convince them of sin and to guide them into believing Jesus Christ, I find fruit unto God.
Almost the only people in church today who trust Romans 10:13 for their salvation are those who from within the church at one (or a few) time (s) became concerned for their souls and sought relief. It may have been at an altar call, it may have been one on one conversation. They will cling to that futile hope against all the effort the Holy Ghost can send their way. Unwitting pastors will aid the deception. Their one and only one criteria for whether a person is saved or lost is their misguided reliance upon Romans 10:13.
These are people who because they are of good character regularly attend church. The Catholics have such people. The Muslims do. The Mormons do. the Jehovah Witnesses do. All religions do. All religions have people who hold onto promises of men wherein they think that they have eternal life. The misuse of Romans 10:13 has transformed good churches into holding cells for the unwitting damned.
They will take their attendance and their immersion in church activities, their private devotions, and all other religious trappings for evidence of salvation. It is not evidence of salvation in a Buddhist temple. Nor is it evidence of salvation in a Muslim Mosque. It is not evidence of salvation in a Baptist church. The evidence of salvation is a clear memory of, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ, Acts 20:21. It is a witness of the Spirit of God; The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God, Romans 8:16.
I want to see the fruit of the Spirit in my people's lives. I sorrow when I perceive that love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: is not and never does run their private lives. I wait while the great God of Abraham, Isaac and of Jacob extends his longsuffering and goodness to them. He desires their deliverance, but one of the greatest hindrances to that deliverance is some past memory of praying that religious prayer. They will not let God get to the core of their sin to expose it for what it is so that he can heal them in the bowels of Christ Jesus.
|
|
Since ye seek a proof of Christ speaking in me, which to you-ward is not weak, but is mighty in you, 2nd Corinthians 13:3.
I am a member of the King James Bible Debate which is a group on Facebook. I am an occasional contributor but often I have learned from the well grounded and excellent students of the bible who frequent that group. As the title suggests, not everyone who frequents the site believes in the inerrancy of the King James Bible. Recently, a reader used a big colored box to pose the following question:
What proof is there of the KJV being the only correct translation?
That has always been the question in any time period. How do I know the truth? The answer is always the same. There were many people speaking in the name of Jesus Christ during the times of the apostles. Not all of them spoke the truth. For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ, Philippians 3:18. How was anyone to tell who was right? The Apostle Paul's answer to those who sought proof of whether or not Christ spoke through him was to test the power (our opening verse 2nd Corinthians 13:3).
One of the first things that any group of people had to decide when this divisive person showed up in a synagogue was whether or not they were merely hearing the opinions of a man, or hearing the truth of God. For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe, 1st Thessalonians 2:13.
I'm sure that armchair philosophers and errantly educated theologians of today are sure that they themselves (had they lived back then) would have instantly known whether or not the Apostle Paul spoke the truth. Their track record in the 21st century speaks otherwise. Most of them would have counseled that we should listen to all of the sources. They would have judged the various speakers on how easily they could be understood by specific target audiences.
How did people know whether or not Jesus Christ was for real? How did they know? How did they decide? Jesus said; It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life, John 6:63. When officers were sent by the rulers to arrest Jesus Christ, some officers chose not to. Did they decide because of his lineage? Did they weigh whether the scholars had unearthed enough proofs? Or, did something else guide them? The officers answered, Never man spake like this man, John 7:46. They weighed his words.
The proof of a King James Bible is a King James Bible. Because it is the word of God, it will have the exact same amount of authority and power as any piece of paper ever handwritten by the Apostle Paul or one of his scribes. The words of a King James Bible are just as much spirit and life as the words that came out of the mouth of Jesus Christ. Other versions my contain brief excerpts that have similar words, but the reader is forced to parse through chapter after chapter with little assurance, little power, and little life. Those of us who use the King James Bible, who live by it, and who worship God in accordance with its precepts, do so because of its power and work in our lives as we read and study it. Day by day, year by year, it proves itself in our inward parts. It speaks to us as only God can.
Are there any other proofs? Yes, but if you approach it through those other proofs you will miss its true proof. When I was an evolutionist, I thought that it would be impossible for me to ever believe in creation without blindfolding a portion of my intellect. When the word of God convinced me of creation, I discovered a world of science and proofs that should satisfy any open minded person. The proofs of evolution took their true shape in my mind. They turned out to be contrived, out of context and contradictory to observation.
My bookshelf is overflowing with well written and well researched histories of the bible, studies of manuscripts, opinions of language experts, and well reasoned arguments supporting the proposition that God has spoken to us for the last 400 plus years through the King James Bible. They are proofs for the few who care to look. Yet, few are those who when they approach the subject through that portal will be convinced. It is the wrong portal. The correct portal is the King James Bible itself. It can be proved by intellectual exercise and has been over and over. Yet, no one will ever be settled there.
The scholars of Jesus Christ's day chose the wrong criteria with which to judge. The majority of those who heard the Apostle Paul, or Peter, or James, or whoever, made the wrong decision. They did not let those words work in them. They judged them in accordance with whatever flavor of judgment they preferred.
If you want proof of a King James Bible, let it prove itself to you. Set a regimen of reading it. If possible, attend a church that uses it and believes it. Take note of the work it does in your heart and soul. Use that intellect of yours and work out what certain verses are saying when they are written in a style unusual to you. You will find a power that is not in other versions. You will find that your heart is searched as you have never noticed before. Therein is the true proof of a King James Bible. What Proof Has There Ever Been? (purecambridgetext.com)
|
|
Fetcht, Pluckt, and Dwelt
And the dove came in to him in the evening; and, lo, in her mouth was an olive leaf pluckt off: so Noah knew that the waters were abated from off the earth, Genesis 8:11.
A reader of this blog sent me a question regarding our bible's use of the "t" in making some verbs past tense. As has been written about in many places, the King James Translators were grammarians of the first order. They understood language. I know that they understood many languages, but I'm emphasizing here that they knew language itself. They understood the nuances of language. Part of the miracle of the King James Bible is the precision given to every thought through the skilful use of Early Modern English.
Just as it is difficult or nigh unto impossible to find any scholars today who had the skill and knowledge of the King James translators, it is almost impossible to find grammarians who can diagram sentences in the minute detail offered to us in our text. I enjoy articles by various authors such as Paul Scott who labor to pry our minds out of the lazy, slovenly speech and reading habits that we have developed.
I am reminded of art scholars who ceaselessly study a Rembrandt or a Da Vinci painting. They are in awe of its beauty and they marvel at their techniques. Quite often they are unable to unearth how they even mixed their paints. They stare at works of art that no one in our day can duplicate. Comparing a modern version of the bible to the King James Bible is like comparing a high school art project to Rembrandt's Storm on the Sea of Galilee or Da Vinci's Mona Lisa.
The lifelong learning and practice of skilled Renaissance men has no equal in our day. I have long ago ceased from asking English scholars to explain nuances of speech in a King James Bible. They lack the understanding and the skill. My best answers have come from philologists, men who study language itself. They are rare.
With that in mind, let's look at a few places wherein men of impeccable skill used a "t" form of a verb instead of the "ed " form of that same verb when expressing a past tense. We cannot pass off their usage as the preferences of one team of translators compared to another. In Genesis 13 for example, both "dwelt" (verse 18) and "dwelled" (verse 7) are used in the same chapter. Clearly, the translators saw a difference.
"Pluckt" is only used once. And the dove came in to him in the evening; and, lo, in her mouth was an olive leaf pluckt off: so Noah knew that the waters were abated from off the earth, Genesis 8:11. If I rephrased that for current Modern English I would say, " an olive leaf which had been plucked off". How much easier and concise to say, "pluckt"!
Likewise "fetcht" is only used one time. And Abraham ran unto the herd, and fetcht a calf tender and good, and gave it unto a young man; and he hasted to dress it, Genesis 18:7. There appears to me to be a subtle difference in the usage of the past tense. It seems as if the act of fetching was the quick snatch of the right calf by a man in a hurry but not the emphasis of the entire thought.
"Dwelt" is used in the King James Bible far more than "dwelled". "Dwelt" is used 226 times whereas "dwelled" is only used 5 times. As we said before, both past tense forms of the verb are found just 11 verses apart in Genesis 13. As I look at those five places that "dwelled" is used and compare them to the 226 places where the other form is used, I get the impression that it depends on the emphasis. When the translators wanted to place more emphasis on the act of dwelling, they used the form with an "ed".
When the translators wanted to describe a larger scene such as; And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, Genesis 4:16, they used th "t" ending. Going out from the presence of the Lord is the emphasis of the verse, not his dwelling in Nod.
It doesn't take much discernment to realize that my doctorate is not in English, philology or any language skills. I have speculated here. My speculation is based on my confidence that "every word of God is pure" and that the King James Bible is the word of God. I would be fascinated to hear the opinions of some more learned in the skills of language itself. We live in an exciting time for bible research in which the depth of the King James Bible is being explored as we learn just what a great resource and heritage it truly is.
|
|
A Foray into the Proverbs
The desire of a man is his kindness, Proverbs 19:22.
It had been my intent to work continuously on the theme of true conversion but I was arrested this morning by a thought in Proverbs 19:22. I pondered that verse for a while and rolled it around in my mind a few different ways. Finally, I did what I was supposed to do. I believed exactly what it said. Then, an hour later, for the first time in my 43 some years of reading a King James Bible, someone asked me what the first part of that verse meant. If ever I have received marching orders to write, I received some this morning.
First, I want my readers to imagine Solomon's throne room. We know that his throne was carved from ivory and that there were six steps leading up to it. It was flanked by two lions at the stays of the throne and twelve lions on either side of the throne. (Stays: Something that supports or steadies something else; esp. an appliance for holding up or securing in position some part of a structure; a prop, pedestal, buttress, bracket, or the like.)
Imagine this great king sitting on his throne with the two heavy wooden doors of the throne room closed. Around him are a few officers and servants. With a heavy sigh, he orders the doors to be opened. Outside of that door is a long line of litigants, people whose cases were too difficult for the local judges or priests to make final decisions. Solomon will need that great wisdom as the first little knot of people draw nigh to his throne.
He did that for 40 years. You can be sure that after 40 years he had heard every imaginable issue that can arise between family members, neighbors, strangers, business parties, and the like. He has heard the virtuous poor. He has heard the lazy poor. He has endured smug rich men and he has heard virtuous rich men. He has heard shameful sons, mourning fathers and sorrowful mothers. He has seen the effects of wealth and of poverty. He has heard skillful liars seeking to bamboozle him. He has heard the cry of the truthful man who no one is willing to believe.
He has heard it all. The Book of Proverbs is therefore the single greatest and most valuable tool for any person who would seek wisdom to know how to judge.
The Book naturally divides into sections depending on the source and target of Solomon's specific observations. Chapters 1-3 are Solomon's admonitions to his son. In Chapters 4-9, Solomon introduces us to those things that he learned from his Father. He is quoting what David taught him. Chapters 10-24 are his own observations. Proverbs 25-31 are a special batch of Proverbs that had not been originally included but wise King Hezekiah directed his men to copy them out of the 3000 proverbs that Solomon had left behind.
What Solomon has done for us is to compress his 40 years of wisdom and judgment. Those, along with his memories of King David's admonitions to him are divided into 31 chapters ranging from 18-36 verses each. You can be sure that after a number of years of hearing case after case, there came a point when certain truisms would pop into Solomon's mind and he would guide his judgment based on one or more of those truisms. God has graciously given us the summation of those truisms in the Book of Proverbs.
New readers are often discouraged over how little of it they understand. This is a good place for Mark Twain's oft quoted remark wherein he advised us not to worry about the parts of the bible that we don't understand. Worry about the things that we do understand. A new reader to Proverbs will often only understand two or three verses out of the 20 or 30 in a chapter. If that reader should set his heart and mind to incorporate the truth of those two or three verses, his or her life will be greatly improved. As that novice reader reads and rereads the Proverbs of Solomon, he will slowly understand more and more of them.
What then should we say about Proverbs 19:22? The desire of a man is his kindness? Perhaps looking at a couple of new versions will help. By looking at them you can see what the devil wants you to get out of the verse, and you can see exactly what it doesn't mean.
ESV: What is desired in a man is steadfast love.
NIV: What a person desires is unfailing love.
Like the false witnesses at Jesus Christ's trial, these two verses testify against the truth, but they agree not with each other.
What if Proverbs 19:22 meant exactly what it said; and the desire of a man really is his kindness? This morning, I relaxed and believed what it said. I asked myself; "what is a man's desire?". Actually, a man may have many desires that can change in various circumstances or in various times of his life. Imagine the cynicism of Solomon if he were to hear a car salesman explain how kind he had been to an old woman when he offered her the best chair in his office. His desire had been to sell her a car. His desire was his kindness.
Think of David's faux kindness to Uriah the Hittite. Eat and drink, saith he to thee; but his heart is not with thee, Proverbs 23:7. What was David's Kindness? It was his desire. It was a ploy by him to get Uriah to sleep with his wife who was already pregnant so that David's sin could be hid.
What about a person who desires the salvation of his neighbors? His kindness to them will sprout from that desire. What about a mother or father who desires that their family dwell peaceably together. Great will be the kindness of that home!
|
|
According to the Scriptures
For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 1st Corinthians 15:3.
I am troubled over the state of churches. I am especially troubled over the propagation of the gospel. Years ago, Oliver Greene chided his listeners by telling them that, "He was afraid that the devil had slipped some of them a substitute". When the Wesleys began their campaigns in earnest, when George Whitefield preached the gospel, when the Anabaptists of Medieval Europe preached, it was the devil's henchmen inside of the churches and speaking for the churches that withstood them.
I myself almost missed the grace of God by receiving a cheap substitute for true bible repentance and by infiltrating a good ministry. Like any zealot of any religion, I learned the phraseology of the movement I was in. I fasted, I prayed, I street preached, I went door to door, I led people in the "sinner's prayer". I could talk for hours about tiny nuances of doctrine.
Like a good Black Muslim, Mormon, Jehovah Witness, Buddhist, or any other sincere religious adherent, I had quit fornicating. I had quit drugs and alcohol. I did not have a new man. I did these things in the strength of the flesh. Because I no longer did those things so destructive to the flesh and to life itself, I was happier.
I learned the speech, the doctrine, the habits, and the doctrine of Fundamental Baptists. I never missed church. When I did sin, I dutifully confessed it in prayer. I mistook my consciousness of sin and the tenderness of my conscience for the doctrine of the two natures. In reality it was one nature, a very fallen nature seeking relief and fulfilment through religion. My life was proof of the Apostle Paul's admonition in Romans 2:15, Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another.
One of my thoughts would arise and condemn me. Another thought would then arise and accuse the first thought of being all wrong. It would excuse that thought and me. The next thought would come along and accuse them both of being wrong. It was my thoughts that accused and excused one another. I mistook that for the war of two natures within me.
A sinner in such a state is more pleasing to the devil than a sinner in some other form of religion. After all, he did vow; I will be like the most High, Isaiah 14:4. It pleases the devil well to have sinners learn the forms of true salvation and worship, to have them partake of the house of God, and yet to be ignorantly lost in their sins. This is not the first time in history that churches have fallen into such decay.
Such decay is usually a prelude to revival. Revival comes when God enlightens certain men of God as to the blindness of their age. Revival comes when such men cry out against the prevailing theology of their day. Such men are resisted by the orthodox leaders of the churches. Even though the average Fundamental pastor is impotent to affect change in his community, he wars against those who would compel him to change. Fundamental churches of the 21st century are powerless to affect the communities wherein they meet. Revival will happen when good fundamental church members start getting real bible salvation.
If you examine the last 1000 professions made in your church, you'll probably see one of three scriptural outcomes.
Luke 8:12 Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved. They prayed a prayer and no one ever saw the least change in them.
Luke 8:13 They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away. A big hubbub was made when these people made their profession but when one any little thing goes wrong or isn't quite what they want, they are gone.
Luke 8:14 And that which fell among thorns are they, which, when they have heard, go forth, and are choked with cares and riches and pleasures of this life, and bring no fruit to perfection. Jesus said that you can tell them by their fruit. These have no fruit.
Does your church have any people in it who demonstrate a sincere desire to unite with the house of God, live by the precepts of the word of God, mourn over their sin, and bit by bit become transformed by the word of God? Are these people there because you as a pastor, or your pastor found them out in the world lost without Jesus Christ and wooed them through the gospel until they sought Jesus Christ as a remedy for their sin? If you have such a family, and that family has been converted in the last 20 years, you have a truly unique church.
Invariably, when I ask that preaching at occasional preacher meetings, I will get refuted by someone who will tell a persona story of someone converted under their ministry. When I look into it, it always a 30 year old story. The soil with which we work today is distinctly different than it was 30 years ago.
A culture has formed within our churches wherein as many people as possible are persuaded, cajoled, pressured, tricked, and browbeat into praying the "sinner's prayer". In the early 80s a substantial fraction of those people actually tried church. In the last 40 years that fraction has shrunk until the average preacher has no real expectation of seeing such converts actually attend his church or ever acknowledge what took place.
This has led to a whole generation of preachers and apologists for this anemic gospel which has absolutely no saving power. Just as in Sodom a whole generation of children were raised who didn't know how babies were made and who ceased to ever see pregnancies or live births, our church members today rarely or never see changed lives. It is just generally accepted and understood that most people who are saved will never show the least evidence of it in their lives. Wrong! Wrong! Wrong!
Like frogs in a pond who lay thousands of eggs and who see thousands of tadpoles spawned, these religiously sincere soul winners will pray with thousands. What happen to those tadpoles? The vast majority of them become fish food. What differentiates the frog from our religious but misguided soul winner is that the frog has a much higher fraction of her effort become living frogs. Most of her effort ends up as fish poop at the bottom of the pond, but every year there are a few new frogs in the pond. These modern day soul winners can never point to new life in the churches because of their efforts.
Most of the victims of these religious activists become men and women who exhibit zero evidence of salvation, but are now secure from any threat of ever really being saved because someone once promised them life. Because with lies ye have made the heart of the righteous sad, whom I have not made sad; and strengthened the hands of the wicked, that he should not return from his wicked way, by promising him life, Ezekiel 13:2. While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage, 2nd Peter 2:19.
By the grace of God, and through the Black Creek Baptist Church jettisoning much of the last 50 years of teachings about the gospel and soul winning, we have a small but growing cadre of people whose lives have been utterly changed by the gospel of Jesus Christ. They NEVER miss church other than for illness. Their homes are transformed, their families, doctors and in some cases social workers have expressed amazement at the changes in them. Whoever stocks the beer and cigarettes at the local convenience stores has noticed a slackening in sales.
Nevertheless, the ever-so-wise theorists of fundamentalism are sure that we go about it all wrong. We are accused of Calvinism. We are accused of destroying the simplicity of the gospel. We are accused of Lordship salvation. We welcome such people to come and see. We publish testimonies on our website (here). You'll see that we have a couple of sister churches who have awakened to the gospel.
At times I feel like Lot in Sodom. What he did caused babies to be born. Josephus wrote that Sodom has become so depraved that there were no children younger than 12 years old in the city. Yet, Lot was accused of doing it all wrong.
For those who truly desire fruit in their churches, we will be looking at how the gospel got so diluted in our churches, and what we have done about it today. Hint: All too often I here certain dispensationalists narrow the definition of the to the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ as if naught else needed to be preached. What they miss is that Paul said; how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 1st Corinthians 15:3. We need to expound the scriptures from the law, the Psalms, the gospels, and from ALL of the epistles.
I lost some of you with that remark about ALL of the epistles. I hope that your theories bear fruit.
Luke 24:44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.
Luke 24:45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,
Luke 24:46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:
Luke 24:47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.
Luke 24:48 And ye are witnesses of these things.
|
|
With only 18 days left until that dreaded or wonderful day of Christmas (depending on what you believe and practice), I'll offer up this reprint from a few years ago.
Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise, Matthew 1:18. It is interesting to note that the manner of Jesus Christ's birth is well documented but the timing is purposely obscured. I know that we have people who claim that they can trace back the course of Abia (Luke 1:5 and 2nd Chronicles 8:14) and by noting Zacharias's time of duty, they claim that they can establish a date. The odds of going back and setting the time when Solomon established the courses, keeping track of the many times when all temple worship ceased, understanding how Ezra reestablished those courses and then understanding how the Pharisees reestablished those course and keeping track of it on a lunar calendar rather than a solar calendar is quite beyond their ability. The persistence of that fable has become its own Christmas myth.
There is no Jewish feast and there is no prophecy that foretells the time of his birth. It is done on Gentile time. To understand that, keep in mind that Jews were forbidden to take a census ever since Moses took the original count in the Book of Exodus. When thou takest the sum of the children of Israel after their number, then shall they give every man a ransom for his soul unto the LORD, when thou numberest them; that there be no plague among them, when thou numberest them, Exodus 30:12. One of David's greatest failings was to have ordered Joab to number Israel.
Jesus Christ was numbered twice in his life. He was numbered at his birth when his parents went to be taxed (when Romans counted their people) and he was numbered with the transgressors in death (Isaiah 53:12, Matthew 15:28). His life was bracketed with Gentile numbering. His life in between his birth and his death was as written, he was holy undefiled and separate from sinners (Hebrews 7:26).
We have those who object to the "mass" in Christmas. They see that as proof positive that Christmas is some Roman Catholic residue left over for gullible Protestants or Baptists. They do so in ignorance of their native tongue. The Oxford English Dictionary defines Mass as in its usage in a compound: As the second element in compounds: a specified ecclesiastical festival, esp. the feast day of a particular saint. Now surviving chiefly as a combining form, e.g. in Candlemas, Christmas, Lammas, Michaelmas. Even Noah Webster the patron saint of Fundamentalism defines mass primarily in its usage as a day: M'ASS, noun [Low Latin missa. The word signifies primarily leisure, cessation from labor, from the Latin missus, remissus, like the Latin ferioe; hence a feast or holiday.]. Its usage as a Roman Catholic celebration is a secondary definition.
Of course they go apoplectic over the Christmas tree. For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not, Jeremiah 10:3, 4. I have a standing offer to any one offended by my tree; I'll give them $100.00 for every piece of gold or silver they find on my tree. When the bible means "decked with ornaments" it will say "with ornaments" (Ezekiel 16:11 and Isaiah 61:10). Jeremiah 10 describes an idol decked (covered) with silver and gold and carried through the streets. To call the object of Jeremiah 10 a Christmas tree is as sloppy with scripture as the many denominations that Fundamentalists love to criticize.
The angels and the shepherds celebrated the birth of Jesus Christ, but somehow it’s supposed to be wrong if we do it. I understand that the world has corrupted its celebration in every way that it can. They have corrupted the bible, but I haven't gotten rid of my bible. They have corrupted the name of Jesus Christ but I have not ceased honoring that name. In short, the world corrupts everything of God. Part of my job as a Christian is to uphold the things of God in righteousness.
When then was that birth? We know that it happened at the same time as the Roman taxation (which is when censuses were taken). And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed, Luke 2:1. Reason with me for a moment. If you were a Roman Emperor and you wanted to give an order to to tax the whole world, how much time would you give them? The decree had to go forth from Rome and reach the innermost villages of England, the Baltics, France, Germany, North Africa and Palestine. The decree had to be carried forth on ships and then work its way inland by various means and still give the inhabitants a reasonable amount of time to get to their native cities.
The Romans were expert in government. One of their expertises was the usage of a calendar. Is it not reasonable to think that a decree that needed such a great time and effort to disseminate and then to fulfill would conclude at the end of a Roman year? The Roman year originally ended at the winter solstice. With the slippage of their holidays in their usage of an inaccurate calendar, eventually the winter solstice was no longer at the end of a year. What did happen at the end of a year was that every person who had to pay a tax by the end of time period hasted to fulfill the law.
Can anyone else think of a reason why Joseph would put a woman swollen with child on the back of a donkey and make her ride 90 miles to Bethlehem? Why wouldn't any reasonable man who cared for the life of his wife and her unborn child wait until the child was born before undertaking such an arduous journey? The only reason that makes sense is that he had waited but could wait no longer. He came to Jerusalem at the end of a Roman year.
There are two principal objections to a December 25th birth for Jesus Christ. The first is laughable. People can't understand why Shepherds would be in the field in the winter. In our days of internet that should be easy. Go to the Jerusalem Post's website and look up the temperatures. It is usually in the 60 degree Fahrenheit range as a low at night. Even if it was colder, study the habits of people whose towns are suddenly packed with visitors such as Atlanta, Georgia or Salt Lake City, Utah during the Olympics. They rented out every available garage and shed. If someone would rent your manger for good money because the inns were full, where would your sheep be? Don't be stupid, they would be out in a field even if it was freezing out (which it was not).
The second objection is the pagan nature of December 25th historically. Baal's birthday was December 25th and the Romans celebrated the feast of Saturnalia on that day. Since the devil vowed, I will be like the most High (Isaiah 14:14), what day do you think he would be most apt to defile? If I was looking for a Gentile time period for the birth of Jesus Christ, I would look for a date at the end of a year and I would look for a date that devils had sought to defile. Consider the ancient festival of Easter (Ishtar) that was celebrated prior to the establishing of the Passover and prior to the resurrection of Jesus Christ at the same lunar time schedule. It is no coincidence that such a date was defiled by devils. The same devils who cried out, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time? Matthew 8:29, understood timing. They defiled two great Christian feast days before they ever came. From me and my family, Merry Christmas!
|
|
Dr. John M. Asquith 4 min read 4 hours ago 12/05/22
For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ, 2nd Corinthians 2:17.
Jesus Christ had an earthly ministry that lasted approximately three and one half years. In that time he preached to thousands of people, held private talks with his disciples and prayed aloud to his Father. Four different gospels record many of those words. Jesus Christ himself made provision for that record. But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you, John 14:26.
There are two trains of thought about the men who wrote the gospels. One train of thought is that every single thing that those men wrote is perfect. A person holding this view would expect that if they were to have picked up the completed manuscript of any particular gospel or epistle as soon as the author finished writing it, they would have an exactly perfect record of every single word that Jesus spoke. There would be no mistakes. Additionally, they would expect to find perfect and exact doctrine concerning those words.
The other train of thought has a lesser understanding of inspiration. They see the original authors as operating under inspiration in the sense that they perfectly remembered every word spoken by Jesus Christ and they had perfect understanding as to his doctrine, but by no means could we expect mortal men to be perfect in writing it all down. This train of thought would expect that if they were to talk to the authors of the gospels and epistles, those men would have a perfect recollection of everything that Jesus said.
What such men would not expect is that upon picking up the freshly written first copy of any epistle or gospel, is that that writing would be perfect. In other words, they disagree with the oft repeated assertion by most fundamentalists when they state "We believe in the verbal plenary inspiration of the bible in the original autographs".
So, one group believes that there has never been a time in which a perfect copy of the words or doctrine of Jesus Christ could be found. The other group believes that there was a flickering period of time (perhaps 5 to 100 years) when individual perfect writings could be found of the words and doctrine of Jesus Christ. Neither group believes that any of the original autographs were ever compiled into one binder.
In essence, both believe in the miracle of Jesus Christ's teachings. Both groups believe that Jesus Christ promised his disciples that they would remember and understand what he said. One group believes that there was never a time in which a person could have ever held a perfect transmission of those words and doctrine even if they looked over the shoulder of the authors as they wrote. The other group believes that if they had looked over the shoulders of the original authors while they were writing, they would have seen the exact perfect words of God.
This second group therefore believes that if a person had been fortunate enough in the first century to have been in Corinth when either of Paul's epistles had arrived, they could have seen a perfect document. But, if a person in Thessalonica was to be given a copy of that letter, he had no expectation of it being perfect. What really separates the two groups in their expectation of finding a perfect copy of the words and doctrine of Jesus Christ is a period of about 24 hours as the letter was copied, or to have been in one of about 10 or 12 geographical locations on earth for a brief period of time.
If we were to consider the status of a student sitting in a "fundamental" bible college in 2022, what real difference does either theory make? Can he trust the bible in front of him? If he believes that for that flickering moment in time when a church held onto a perfect letter or gospel that document was perfect, will it give him greater clarity as to what he can and can't trust in the bible he currently holds in his hands? What about his counterpart in a "liberal" seminary who believes that the errors may have crept in 24 hours earlier than the student in the "fundamental" seminary believes happened?
In reality, the "liberal" preacher who believes that there were probably errors in the very transmission of the words of Jesus Christ, and the "fundamental" preacher who believes that there were no errors in that transmission but that every and all copies of those same documents probably contain errors can have zero confidence in any given word of their bibles. In reality, it is not the precepts of the bible that make them either "liberal" or "fundamental". It is their personal choices of tradition that distinguish them.
The "liberal" concept of scripture in which the individual author may have erred, and the "fundamental" view in which the individual author was incapable of error are only separated by a few hours in time and a few geographical miles. It's all poppycock to me. I have a King James Bible that is the perfect word of God in the English Language. These other two views are just a bunch of medieval clerics arguing over how many angels can sit on the point of a pin.
|
|
The Value of Punctuation
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled, Matthew 5:18.
In an earlier post, I likened punctuation to a traffic policeman who keeps a busy intersection moving smoothly. With a period, he holds up his hand, blows his whistle, and orders a full stop. With a comma, he cautions the reader to slow down and think before proceeding. With a semicolon, his whistle requires a short pause before cautiously proceeding. With a colon he requires a slightly longer pause before turning onto a new street, but keeping on the same route.
Commas can change the meaning of a sentence. Here are a few examples:
A woman without her man is nothing.
A woman: without her, man is nothing.
In the first iteration the woman is described as nothing without a man. In the second iteration, it is the man who is nothing without the woman. If that was spoken out loud, the speaker would add the colons and commas by pausing as he spoke. "A woman" (Pause slightly longer than what is usual.) "without her" (slight pause) "man is nothing. Then say the entire sentence without pausing. What the colon and the comma did was to convey the meaning meant by the author just as if the author was in the room speaking.
I find inspiration in cooking my family and my dog.
I find inspiration in cooking, my family, and my dog.
Without commas, the first sentence is gruesome. The second sentence correctly uses commas to show that there is a list of things that the author finds inspirational.
Among the many uses of commas is the requirement that a comma be used after certain transition phrases or clauses. One example of this is distinguishing time.
When I went to see the woman I married,
When I went to see the woman, I married.
Two completely different ideas are conveyed. In the first, I went to see a woman with whom I had shared matrimony. Who did I go to see? I went to see the woman I married. In the second, when I went to see the woman. What did I do when I went to see the woman? I performed an action, I married. What would make sense if spoken aloud, only makes sense if punctuated properly.
That brings us to Jude 1:9, Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee. What if there was a comma after the word devil?
When contending with the devil, he disputed about the body of Moses.
To read the verse that way would bring it into line with the new versions which among the many things that they push, maintain that there is only one devil. They believe there are many demons, but only one devil. To put a comma after the word "devil" would be to make the devil mentioned, "the devil". But, it is not the devil. It is a devil. What devil is it? It is the devil he disputed about the body of Moses.
Your King James Bible describes for us a spiritual world in which there are many devils. Not long after I began to realize that the King James Bible was perfect, I encountered a young man in a laundromat. Seeing him read a bible, I expressed my belief that the King James Bible was infallible. He instantly rebuked me. He said that there was only one devil but many demons, and that my bible had botched a very important doctrine.
It is good for a young bible student to get a bloody nose from time to time. Obviously, I am speaking metaphorically. A good street fighter got that way by getting his nose broken too many times. Each time it happened, he learned a new trick, and the one pulled on him to break his nose the last time will never work on him again. Likewise, it is the interactions with self important and deluded new-version advocates that often bloodies a bible believer's nose. If he is a serious student of the word of God he will limp home with a bloody nose. He will get into the book and study until he knows how to answer that latest attack used against his bible.
Just as my laundromat heretic had said, I quickly saw that the are two main words in the Greek text that the King James Bible translators translated as "devil". In that these same men had read every extant Greek writing left by the ancient Greeks, and in that they had encountered those two words used in hundreds of years and countless Ancient Greek authors, as opposed to the school girls who call themselves translators today who have mostly only read bible manuscripts in Greek and then read lexicons written by heretics, I trusted their clear translation which showed that there are many devils.
When I looked up the Greek word that all bibles translate as "devil" to see if it is ever plural, I saw that just as the heretic had stated, it is never plural. But, I also saw that Jesus said, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?, John 6:70. In Oliver Greene's commentaries he changed that to read "the devil". Why would he do that? Because he had heard that there was only one devil and he trusted the Greekifiers more than his King James Bible.
The new version advocates have little choice when viewing John 6:70. They explain the verse away. They see Jesus as using it descriptively, not doctrinally. "Oh, you devil", the woman screamed at her husband. She is not saying that her husband is the devil from the garden of Eden. She is likening him to that devil.
Until recently, I used John 6:70 as a proof text when dealing with a new-version advocate who argues for there being only one devil. In my preaching, reading, and private study, I have merely trusted my God-given bible. Recently, the Lord made me dissect Jude 1:9. There it was, a clear case in which there is more than one devil. Jude described the devil who contended with the angel. It was, the devil he disputed about the body of Moses. It needed to be identified from among other devils.
I believe that I have a perfect bible in my King James Bible. I trust every word, italization, verse marking, subscript, and punctuation as given by God. Where two king James Bibles may differ slightly in a spelling, an occasional word, inclusion of subscripts, or in punctuation, I will always believe the Pure Cambridge Text of the Bible as printed between c1920 and 1985 by The Cambridge University Press and now printed by a few noble printers around the world.
|
|
Understanding Transitions
And of the children of Issachar, which were men that had understanding of the times, to know what Israel ought to do, 1st Chronicles 12:32.
The bible is not a static timeline in which nothing changes. God has divided all of history and the future into times. We are told of the "times of the Gentiles". The Apostle Paul spoke of times when he said; And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:, Acts 17:30.
Prophecy is often revealed in terms of time. And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book, Daniel 12:1. And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end, Daniel 12:9.
When God changes the times, he does so in a coherent pattern made known by the word of God. Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets, Amos 3:7. All too often I hear preachers speak of the changes in the bible in terms of dispensations (a term never made plural in the bible). To hear them is to imagine a trumpet sounding at some juncture of time and suddenly everything changes.
Ask some young preacher why sacrifices were necessary in the Old Testament and are not required today. All too often he'll say, "It was a change of dispensations." Wrong answer, the correct answer is that the sacrifice of Jesus Christ is sufficient for all sin. The time changed through a series of events that are well catalogued in our bible.
The Book of Acts is a book of transition. It begins with the disciples huddled in the upper room. It begins with the nation of Israel being guilty of murdering their Messiah, but not aware of the magnitude of what they had done. The Lord was about to transition Israel. In perfect accordance with the Mosaic Law, Israel was offered a chance to repent as a nation.
After Peter preached and accused Israel of having slain Jesus Christ, he offered them a reprieve. And now, brethren, I wot that through ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers, Acts 3:17. Every Jew in that crowd knew that God offered a remedy for sin done in ignorance. Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a soul shall sin through ignorance against any of the commandments of the LORD concerning things which ought not to be done, and shall do against any of them, Leviticus 4:2.
If we want to understand the transition that was to take place upon Israel's failure to heed Peter's warning, we must understand what they were required to do. Moses made a specific provision for an occasion when the entire congregation was guilty of a sin of ignorance.
Leviticus 4:13 And if the whole congregation of Israel sin through ignorance, and the thing be hid from the eyes of the assembly, and they have done somewhat against any of the commandments of the LORD concerning things which should not be done, and are guilty;
Leviticus 4:14 When the sin, which they have sinned against it, is known, then the congregation shall offer a young bullock for the sin, and bring him before the tabernacle of the congregation.
Leviticus 4:15 And the elders of the congregation shall lay their hands upon the head of the bullock before the LORD: and the bullock shall be killed before the LORD.
Leviticus 4:16 And the priest that is anointed shall bring of the bullock's blood to the tabernacle of the congregation:
Leviticus 4:17 And the priest shall dip his finger in some of the blood, and sprinkle it seven times before the LORD, even before the vail.
Leviticus 4:18 And he shall put some of the blood upon the horns of the altar which is before the LORD, that is in the tabernacle of the congregation, and shall pour out all the blood at the bottom of the altar of the burnt offering, which is at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.
Leviticus 4:19 And he shall take all his fat from him, and burn it upon the altar.
Leviticus 4:20 And he shall do with the bullock as he did with the bullock for a sin offering, so shall he do with this: and the priest shall make an atonement for them, and it shall be forgiven them.
Leviticus 4:21 And he shall carry forth the bullock without the camp, and burn him as he burned the first bullock: it is a sin offering for the congregation.
We know that the blood of Jesus Christ was brought into the most holy place;
Hebrews 10:19 Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus,
Heb 10:20 By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh.
We know that he suffered without (outside of) the gate; Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate, Hebrews 13:12. What was needed for the whole congregation to be forgiven for the death of Jesus Christ was for the elders of the congregation to take responsibility for that death.
We can see that on three occasions the Holy Ghost brought witnesses into the presence of these men to hear the truth about the collective sin of Israel. The elders of Israel clearly understood that the apostles were trying to get them to take the responsibility; Saying, Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name? and, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man's blood upon us, Acts 5:28.
In 1st Samuel 8:7, Israel rejected God the Father; And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them. In Matthew 27:25, they rejected God the Son; Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children. Acts chapter seven was strike three for Israel as a national entity. They rejected the Holy Ghost; Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye, Acts 7:51.
The elders made the clear choice to not take the responsibility for the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Among the many facets of the law that Jesus Christ came to fulfill was the provision that if the elders of Israel would lay their hands (take responsibility) upon the sacrifice made for the sin of ignorance, God would pardon the sin of ignorance. From the end of Acts chapter 7 until the fulfilment of Zechariah 13:6 in the great tribulation, Israel was cut off as nation.
That does not mean that God will not honor or save individual Jews. As I explained to my church. If our church was denied credit at the local bank, that does not mean that individuals from this church are denied credit. Just because Israel, as a national unit was cut off from the promises of God, does not mean that individuals from that nation could not come to God through Jesus Christ.
What does happen in the very next chapter is that God scattered the church, he reached out to the Samaritans, and he saved the Ethiopian Eunuch. A transition took place. To try to explain that transition with trite words or simple phrases like "dispensational change" obscures the work of God, the promise of the scripture and makes a mockery of Paul's rule for sound doctrine.
1st Timothy 1:9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
1st Timothy 1:10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other things that is contrary to sound doctrine;
In order for a doctrine to be proven sound, it must be provable under the law. That Israel as an entire congregation was cut off from the promises of God is provable under the law. It is sound doctrine.
|
|
A Three Legged Stool or a Balancing Act?
Prove all things; hold fast that which is good, 1st Thessalonians 5:21.
We have a perfect Bible. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 2nd Timothy 3:16. It is by means of that scripture, The King James Bible, that we May be able to comprehend with all saints what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height, Ephesians 3:18. The Lord in his goodness has provided a means by which 21st century Christians can indeed prove all things.
In the first couple of centuries wherein the King James Bible was available to men, they were hampered by a few things.
1. With very few exceptions only the common people and uneducated believed it to be infallible.
2. Men were riveted to theologies which in limited contexts appeared sound, but failed when tried in the fullness of scripture.
3. The study aids available today whereby we can easily summon verses by just remembering one or two words took centuries to develop.
We are light years ahead of those who were limited by the above features if we indeed believe the words of a King James Bible, prove each conclusion to which we arrive at by examining each context wherein that conclusion can be tested, and avail ourselves of the multitude of concordances and bible software made available today.
As the title of this post suggests, I have likened doctrinal theories to a stool. All too often, someone will propose a doctrine or theory which has two legs to it, but when examined in the breadth of the bible, proves to be just a balancing act or a two legged stool. To be a three legged stool there must be:
1. a doctrine,
2. verses to back that doctrine,
3. and then that third leg, there must be verifiable evidence that the rest of the bible in context backs up that doctrine.
Many year ago, I was privy to a debate between two students of the bible as to the identity of the Great Whore of Revelation 17. One of the students pointed out that Rome sits upon seven hills and quoted Revelation 17:9, And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth. The other student won the day by looking up the definition of mountain in a modern dictionary and pointing out that Rome's seven hills do not meet the criterion to be called mountains. They weren't high enough.
Years later, I can see that argument as being a two legged stool. To know what the King James Bible meant by a mountain we would need to look up each occurance of the word and to examine the height of each place. As it turns out many of the places that the King James Bible calls mountains did not meet the modern dictionary definition of "mountain". When his theory was examined in each context, it proved faulty. A mountain in the King James Bible is a hill with a significantly higher elevation than the surrounding area. Rome qualified.
Likewise, Unitarianism can appear correct if we huddle behind a few verses and judge all the rest of the bible from that perspective. The belief that Jesus Christ is not God can not stand in the fullness of scripture. Its one leg is a preordained belief . Its second leg are a few verses divorced from context, and beyond that it remains a balancing act. There can never be a firm third leg with a supporting unity of scripture.
If we go to a cemetary outside of a city, and we crouch behind a gravestone, we can obscure our view of that city. We will become experts able to describe every nuance of that gravestone, but the landscape wherein it sits and the view behind it is utterly obscured. Such is the hapless Jehovah Witness who has had Ecclesiastes 9:5 drilled into him. For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten, Ecclesiastes 9:5.
If that was the only verse about the condition of dead people, the theory that upon death, all consciousness ceases could be considered valid. What a Jehovah Witness has in reality is a two legged stool. He has a verse, he has an interpretation of that verse, but he will search in vain for any practical application of that doctrine to be found in scripture. If Jesus Christ had reiterated that interpretation, or if any apostle had done so and the weight of scripture showed over and over again that people are simply snuffed out of existence upon their death, they would have a three legged stool that could stand on its own.
Instead, we have verse after verse, example after example and parables to refute what they believe. That doesn't matter to them. They are hidden behind an interpretation of that verse. Their entire peer group counts on them staying there. As Dr. Peter Ruckman so aptly pointed out years ago, when you pin them with other verses, they do the "cowardly crawfish". They slide sideways and go right back to their pet verse.
What good is a perfect bible if you insist upon doctrines that cannot bear close examination? To be a King James Bible believer is more than just knowing its historical accuracy. To be a King James Bible believer you must be willing to believe any doctrine that can be upheld and proven in the length and breadth of scripture.
|
|
Heresies vs. Factions
For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you, 1st Corinthians 11:19.
I have observed that many preachers when quoting 1st Corinthians 11:19, will quickly say that what is meant by heresies is sects or factions. They get this from their extremely limited understanding of the Greek Text, and by having read it in a commentary. As usual, the King James Bible stated it perfectly. There must also be heresies among you.
As many of you know, the King James Bible translators and its editors throughout the years placed alternative readings in the margin of the bible. The translators themselves were restricted as to what they were allowed to put in the margins of the bible.
Rule #4 for the translators:
When any word hath divers significations, that to be kept which hath been most commonly used by the most eminent fathers, being agreeable to the propriety of the place and the analogies of faith.
That rule is often interpreted through rule #6.
Rule #6:
No marginal notes at all to be affixed, but only for the explanation of the Hebrew or Greek words, which cannot, without some circumlocution, so briefly and fitly be expressed, in the text.
Rule #7:
Such quotations of places to be marginally set down as shall serve for the fit reference of one Scripture to another.
King James hated many of the marginal notes in the Geneva Bible. Throughout the middle ages, the Catholic Church controlled those who could read the bible by attaching "glosses" to key verses. A "gloss" is a brief explanation of how that verse was to be interpreted. Jehovah Witnesses, Mormons, Roman Catholics and many other organizations have found that if they whisper in a bible readers ear while they read, they can keep their adherents safely in the fold.
Marginal notes work well for that work. Therefore the King James Bible was to be free of them. What you will find in most King James Bibles with centerline references is an occasional alternative translation to a keyword. This was most often done when the translators knowingly chose an alternative definition to a word. Men who have read hundreds and thousands of ancient documents in any given language know that no word has a meaning so firmly affixed to a definition that it must always be interpreted exactly the same.
When a first year student of Ancient Greek begins to hyperventilate over the word "heresies" in 1st Corinthians 11:19, and splutter that it means "sects" or "factions", calmly show him that the word "sect" is in the marginal notes. The King James translators weren't stupid. They knew that definition. They rejected it but put it in the margins to keep Reverend Novice's head from exploding.
Why does our bible say "heresies"? Why doesn't it say "sects" or "factions" as the ESV does: for there must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized. What truly makes a sect or faction within a church dangerous to the cohesion of the church is false doctrine. Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners, 1st Corinthians 15:33.
A faction in a church who would prefer a different color carpet, or who like the Clemson University Tigers over the University of South Carolina Gamecocks can get out of hand, but for the most part such differences will always brew within a church. They can even be fun if handled with charity. What hurts a church is the smart alec who seeks a following by dividing the congregation in doctrinal matters.
The Apostle Paul tells you that such men are actually needed in the church. The wise saint of God can watch such a person's manner of life, the fruit of his doctrine and its effect upon those who follow it. He can then compare that to those who follow the truth. God will make it manifest.
Heresies cause sects or factions to form. Sects do not cause heresies to form. Heresy is at the root of church destroying factions. Our King James Bible got it right.
|
|
Civic Responsibility and the Word of God
In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes, Judges 17:6.
The days when a child could go to a public school and be taught the difference between his own personal responsibilities towards the country wherein he lives, and the collective responsibilities of the state are long gone. Whereas the socialists and humanists have spread their cancerous ideas using textbooks and other teaching aids, the bible correctors have whittled away at God's clear message about individual men's responsibilities from within the churches themselves.
The greatest lecture ever given on the duties of men as individuals and the duties of men as a group was given by Moses in the Book of Deuteronomy. We know this because our King James bible uses inflected pronouns. When it says thou shalt, it is a commandment to men as individuals. When it says ye shall, it is a commandment to men as a group. As has been pointed out many times before, the "th" pronouns, thou, thee, thy, thine are singular. The "y" pronouns, ye, you, your, yours are plural.
As each man stood and listened to Moses, or afterwards read those words, he was able to know when he was required to take action individually, and when he was required to operate as a group.
Deuteronomy 13:1 If there arise among you (plural) a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee (singular) a sign or a wonder,
Deuteronomy 13:2 And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee (singular), saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou (singular) hast not known, and let us serve them;
Deuteronomy 13:3 Thou (singular) shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you (plural), to know whether ye (plural) love the LORD your (plural) God with all your (plural) heart and with all your (plural) soul.
A man hearing this in Hebrew or a person trained to read a King James Bible can realize that God will judge a nation based on the individual actions of men.
There are times when men as individuals were commanded to kill. We are under Romans 13:4 today wherein we have been taught that the sword lies in the hands of duly appointed magistrates and lawmen. For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
None of us is commanded to kill outside of self defense, military duty or having been properly deputized. But, what about jury duty? Do you have a bible that has taught you individual responsibility? There simply has never been a better prepared citizenry on this earth than a citizenry composed of people who learned civic duty from a King James Bible.
Read through Deuteronomy 12-30. Watch as God divides responsibility between individuals and the nation as a whole. Now, try to do that with an NIV or an ESV. The unwitting purveyors of these watered down goody-two-shoes bibles have been part of Satan's never ending attack on those nations which once stood for truth.
|
|
I am glad to be back. I have been victim of the flu this past week.
Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth, 2nd Timothy 2:15.
I have been working my way through historian Christopher Hill's book The English Bible and the Seventeenth-Century Revolution. Publishing the complete and unadulterated word of God and giving it to the English public was in itself a revolution. The King James Bible was to set in motion many conflicts of thought. What the Nicolaitans (clergy who rule over the laity with a heavy hand) and despotic rulers had long dreaded came to pass. Every man who wanted to find the perfect form of government in his bible felt free to do so.
Not only did men feel free to think out the rudiments of government for themselves as they searched their bibles, they felt free to speak plainly about their ideas. I have had the benefit of 400 more years of history to study. I have had the perfectly printed word of God in a easily read and inexpensive format, and I have had innumerable study aids. I firmly believe that the bible does not expressly endorse any form of government. It merely gives us infallible precepts and principles toward which any government should strive regardless of its form, and principles to which any individual should adhere while under a government.
17th century men would have had trouble with that statement. Like the proverbial blind men with the elephant, each man groped through his bible and more often than not found justification for his pet theories for how men should be governed under God. There were men who looked at verses such as Ecclesiastes 8:4; Where the word of a king is, there is power: and who may say unto him, What doest thou?; and proclaimed that men had no right to stand against a king. During the turmoil of James II's reign there were bishops who proclaimed that if he chose to kill us all we should submit.
Bishop Abbot saw in the Book of Jonah that only a king could proclaim a public fast. Others saw in the story of Jehu that a man with a revelation from God could make himself king but he had to kill the existing king. Men saw that locusts were wise for having no king.
The English People, hair splitters of the first order, eventually beheaded their king and established a commonwealth. They tried living with the wisdom of locusts. Despite the virtues of Cromwell's life and despite the fear that other nations had of his might, the Puritan Parliament exhibited far less wisdom than locusts. They banned Christmas, figgy pudding and Maypoles. They meddled in things in which no government should meddle.
Upon the death of Cromwell, they swung the pendulum the other way and restored the monarchy in the person of lecherous King Charles II. They rejoiced in orgies, banished Puritan divines to slavery in the Caribbean and reduced themselves to a second rate power subservient to the French King. In each of those pendulum swings there were men eagerly pointing to passages in scripture justifying their current government.
The wide swings in government along with the violence and oppressions that such swings bring were to continue up through the Glorious Revolution of 1688. Good God fearing men were to thrust their bibles forth in opposition one to another condemning anything but how they read their bibles. It would be another century before the simple Baptist concept of the separation of church and state took hold anywhere other than Rhode Island.
It is to this century of instability that bible deniers and humanists often refer when they condemn any bible principles in government. What they fail to see is that Muslim nations are still caught in that swinging pendulum. Humanistic or atheistic nations tend to dehumanize. It is those lands that endured the maturing agonies of nations getting to know their bibles which were able to eventually establish good and beneficial government for their people.
It is the principles and precepts of the bible that make the difference. It is bible believing men and women who remain the savory pinch of salt in a land. By acting on its precepts they preserve a land. Landscapes shift quickly. Situations change. Bible precepts do not. As the humanists seek to debunk the bible, and the Muslims seek to elevate the Koran (which has never established liberty in any land), the silly bible correctors gnaw away at the faith of those who hold to a perfect bible.
The fight for the King James Bibles is more than just scholars squabbling over minute issues. The defenders of the King James Bible are defending one of the great foundations of civil liberty for English Speaking People.
|
|
The Bible as an Effective Truth
As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction, 2nd Peter 3:16.
One Effect of the King James Bible upon the World....
One of my favorite historical subjects is the development of English civil liberty. I am a citizen of the United States of America and as such I have inherited much from the development of civil liberty among the English speaking People. What I marvel at is the chaos and disorder from which this great inheritance sprang and the guiding hand of God upon the people of God in ordering those nations which were birthed from the United Kingdom.
I am not calling the English People or Britons the people of God. What I am saying is that from within that great amalgamation of the English, Welsh, Scottish and Irish peoples that became known as Great Britain, God raised up men who grasped the principles of the King James Bible and its predecessor, the Geneva Bible, and in grasping those principles wrestled out those great truths upon which a free society stands.
The Catholic Church, established rulers, and the wealthy generally feared the dissemination of the word of God among the common people. They rightly envisioned the chaos and turmoil that arose as that lighted firebrand of truth was tossed into the dry tinder of the English Speaking public. What those enemies of dispersing the bible among the people never envisioned was the guiding hand of a great and powerful God upon those who would wrestle with the revelations of God's word now made accessible to the lowest of people.
It was not uncommon in the early 1600s for a dissenting person (worshiping outside of the legally recognized church) to use the Book of Revelation to identify specific government figures as being the living, breathing fulfillment of prophecy. Established clergymen and parliamentarians were often horrified to see their names in print. They saw the use of the bible among the masses as a horror to good government.
For anyone who has attended a prophecy conference in the last 60 years, the process of exciting people is familiar. By carefully identifying current events and then finding parallels in prophetic scripture, a preacher can keep whole congregations on the edge of their seats. As events slowly change the political climate, no one notices that almost nothing of what the man said comes true. For example, in the 1960s and the 1970s, the Common Market was regularly identified as the reenactment of the Roman Empire even though its boundaries and population scarcely were the same. Bar codes were quickly seized upon as the mark of the beast.
It took the good grace of God and the wisdom of many good people to slowly sift through the overwhelming abundance of truth which was made available to the English Speaking people, and to knit together those truths which in their proper context made plain what are the rights and duties of men as individuals as opposed to the rights and duties of Kings and nations.
Among the many miracles wrought in the giving of the King James Bible is the miracle of responsible government being made available to men on this earth. We shall see in further posts how that the bible is a single cohesive message from God to man, but that it is so composed that the prideful and foolish will stumble. We shall also see how that having a perfect bible is essential to ever really trusting the bible.
Many good patriots and lovers of truth and good government have become dupes of hell in their support for the new versions. There is simply no greater foundation in the English Speaking world than the King James Bible. If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do? Psalms 11:3.
|
|
 |
A recent conversation with a pastor friend. 07/16/21, updated 4/25/22, and it seems to be getting worse! 10/17/22
Very few people seem to realize that everyone can’t have a different opinion and all be right, but many of them want to continue to argue and fight about it.
Prophecy is the biggest joke with proper Bible interpretation, and I warn people about that too!
My pastor friend said, “Your observations are true- you have ten Baptists in a room and get 25 different opinions..... As for prophecy, wrong Eschatology is the common thread among all the false religion- it affects more than what most think.”
|
|
|
|
Among vs. Amongst
A reprint from 2018
The preposition "among" is used 916 times in the King James Bible. The preposition "amongst" is only used twice, each time in the Book of Genesis. Most dictionaries tell us that there is zero difference between among and amongst. Some suggest that "amongst" is a slightly more poetic way of saying "among". Daniel Webster's 1828 dictionary ignores "amongst" altogether.
In reviewing the 400 years of printing the King James Bible, and in keeping track of the various errors that crept in over the years and were then expunged by editors, the use of "amongst" was a common mistake. If any of my readers own a 400th Anniversary Edition of the King James Bible published by Zondervan, or any other replica of an original 1611, they can readily see that Genesis 23:6 uses "amongst" instead of "among". That was a printer's error and it was corrected in later editions.
In our Bible today, there are only two usages of the word "amongst" that have passed the test of time and scholarship to be kept in our text. As is our wont here, we will go to the Oxford English dictionary (Unabridged) to see how the word "amongst" was defined in 1611. We are told that Amongst is, "Less Usual in the primary local sense than among, and when so used, generally implying dispersion, intermixture, or shifting position." In other words, when someone walks among sheep, he is different than the sheep he mixes with. To walk amongst the sheep, would imply that his nature had been dispersed and intermixed with the sheep's. His position in relation to the sheep's had shifted. Jesus Christ could walk among men, he could never walk amongst them. He was different than man. He was not so intermixed and dispersed amongst us that he could not be distinguished. The officers answered, Never man spake like this man, John 7:46.
Adam's very nature changed. If there was no more scripture to be found after Genesis 3:8, that could be proved just by the preposition. Adam had shifted position. Whatever those trees were (and we know them to be devils), Adam and Eve had become dispersed and intermixed with them. There is much that can be learned by paying attention to prepositions. Among vs. Amongst (purecambridgetext.com)
|
|
|
|
Woe Worth the Day
Son of man, prophesy and say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Howl ye, Woe worth the day!, Ezekiel 30:2.
As we sat reading our bibles in a motel room, my wife looked up from her morning reading and asked, "What does woe worth the day mean?". I mumbled a few things based on the context and then realized that I had never stopped to consider the phrase. In its context there can be no doubt that it's telling you that the day in question will be a terrible day of woe. But, now that I stopped and considered the phrase, "woe worth the day", it intrigued me. The word "worth" was used differently here than anywhere else in the bible.
A young person today who is taught to read a King James Bible is in reality given a portal into time. He can read the past, he can see the future and he can better understand the present. He is immersed in a dialog between God and man prepared over 400 years ago. He can gain a feel for other times as he savours wording that in some instances has escaped our current culture, and at other times such as "skin of my teeth", he can partake in the timelessness of the language.
Woe worth was once a well understood phrase amongst the English public. A popular Scottish folk song began with that phrase:
Woe worth the tyme and eik the place
That shee wes to me knowne,
For sine I did behold her face,
My hart wes never my owne,
my owne jo my owne,
My hart wes never my owne.
English Poet Stephen Hawes used the phrase liberally:
Woe worth sin without repentance!
Woe worth bondage without release!
Woe worth man without good governance!
Woe worth infinal pain and distress!
Woe worth vice put far in press!
Woe worth sovereignty having disdain!
Woe worth pity that doth refrain!
There are many dictionaries online which understand the phrase. The Oxford English Dictionary has this to say when looking up "worth" as a verb:
Obsolete except in woe worth (a person or thing); a. intransitive. To come to be, come to pass, come about, happen, take place.
Being linked to a history and a culture bigger than our present reality is a good thing. I was once babysat by a woman who was born in 1872. When inspecting us, she would grab our ears and exclaim, "there's enough dirt in there to grow potatoes". Who grabbed her ears when she was a child and said that same thing? Was it someone born in the 1700s?
I read the phrase "woe worth the day" for over 40 years without even thinking about it. Its meaning was obvious in context. I missed something there. I missed a link to being part of a continuous culture stretching back for centuries. How rich to teach our children this timeless heritage! Woe Worth the Day (purecambridgetext.com)
|
|
|
Government, Church and Marriage
Dr. John M. Asquith 9/22/22 - 6 min read
Can two walk together, except they be agreed?, Amos 3:3.
For the first 20 centuries after the birth of Jesus Christ, both secular government and the Christian Church agreed on the definition of marriage. Various governments have regulated marriage differently by legislating such things as age limitations, health standards, and grievously have even sought to regulate the racial mixture of those who marry. There are secular governments that allow polygamy and those that restrict it. Up until the 21st century, almost all secular governments defined marriage as a union between men and women.
That has changed. This post is not about getting the governments to change their collective minds. Sodomite marriage is a punishment from God. It is a rightful judgment upon nations that forgot him.
Romans 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
Romans 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
Romans 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
You will note that it is God that turns nations over to such.
Where does that leave the church? United States Supreme Court Associate Justice Samuel Alito asked that very question in the oral arguments that led to Sodomite marriage being legalized in all 50 states and American held territories. He asked how a national recognition of the rights of Sodomites to marry those of their own sex would be handled in light of the Bob Jones decision? To refresh the memories of some and to inform others I'll explain that decision. The Bob Jones decision sprang from a stupid rule that Bob Jones University once imposed upon its students. Interracial marriage and dating were forbidden.
(For a discussion on the merits of such an unbiblical policy click here.)
In that Bob Jones University was entirely voluntary in who was allowed to study there, and in that Bob Jones University took absolutely no government funds to operate or to pay its students tuition, they considered themselves safe from government intervention. That proved to be wrong. The Government of the United States took away their tax free status. No longer could the university shield its income from taxes. Any other immunities that it shared with all other religious and educational systems regarding taxation were considered void.
The Supreme Court ruled that because Bob Jones University exercised a policy that was in direct opposition to the public good as interpreted by the federal government, it had no right to a tax free status. Therefore, Justice Alito wondered aloud how the implementation of Sodomite marriage as a federal policy would affect institutions that restricted such? No answer was given.
I think that any interested observer of the cultural shifts in Western Culture can agree that the changes are coming fast and furious. What was a trickle in the 1940s, 50s, 60, 70, and 80s, picked up steam in the 90s and early 2000s. Traditional cultural morés have exponentially collapsed in the last decade. More change is coming. We have not reached Sodom and Gomorrah levels yet. In Sodom, sodomy was not voluntary. It was mandated. And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them, Genesis 19:5.
We are not far from parents receiving a note that says, "little Johnny wouldn't cooperate in health class today". Anyone who doesn't believe that has either blocked out all news of the pressures placed on public school teachers and students in regards to sodomy and sexual mutilation, or is in willful denial. The same people who in 2015 said that they were not after our children, but that they only wanted the right to marry, are now after our children.
On September 8th of this year, the excellent publication Powerlineblog.com copied pictures and instructions from a book for junior high boys that showed them how to sodomize each other and encouraged the activity. The book is in the public school libraries. (I did not paste the link to go directly to that post. The images are so graphic that it would be good for an interested reader to scroll down several pages with discernment for who else is watching to get to that September post rather than to click on it and instantly see it.)
Most polling is showing that in any given week, 72% of men in Fundamental Baptist churches have viewed pornography in the last seven days. That seems to be in line with the general population. One of the effects of pornography is to desensitize its users. Why are so many men allowing their boys to wear dresses to school? Why is there such a feeble backlash to girls getting radical mastectomies in their early teens? The perverted sexual haze that so many men find themselves in explains much.
How then should churches respond to the rapidly changing cultural landscape? I instruct my people to be kind to every person with whom they interact. It was heterosexuals who first denigrated marriage into being a tax right off. A survey of your members will quickly identify many who first sexually cohabited with their current spouse, then eventually married in order to get the legal and social benefits of marriage. That was a purposeful denigration of the sacredness of marriage. Sodomites sought for that same recognition. I hate that new view of marriage but by no means do I see it as strictly a sodomite innovation.
The concept of Common Law marriage which had long protected those under the English Constitution, or in Common Law states elsewhere has been turned on its head by recent cultural depravities, laws and court rulings. Immoral heterosexuals helped change that. Under most governments that recognize Common Law marriage, there needs to be a demonstrated intent on the part of those cohabiting to be in a marriage relationship. Our cohabiting heterosexuals have no desire to demonstrate such.
There is simply no excuse for a christian to be rude or hateful to a sodomite. If I was to go through my church and cull out all those who crossed sexual lines that just a generation ago would have been considered disgraceful, I would lose a lot of good people who today are pure before God through the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and who now are heterosexual in marriage and desire. If a known sodomite wanted to attend one of my services, my only stipulations would be that he or she come with an open mind, and that they do nothing to needlessly offend us culturally. That turns their own ideas of inclusiveness back onto them.
What we have done to protect ourselves from a Bob Jones court case type of ruling is to divorce ourselves from Caesar. We no longer exercise the right to sign marriage certificates. Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and unto God the things which be God's, Luke 20:25. We no longer agree with Caesar over the definition of marriage. Therefore the signing of a marriage certificate whether heterosexual or sodomite by any minister working in behalf of the Black Creek Baptist Church, or on the premisses of the Black Creek Baptist Church is prohibited by our constitution.
We open our church building which has an old historical and sentimental attachment for many to religious marriage ceremonies which are in keeping with our faith. That ceremony is to be strictly religious and can not be accompanied by a legal certificate signed on our property or on our behalf. We got out of the business of state marriage. We no longer walk as one with Caesar.
How long that provision will protect us from a state persecution à laBob Jones as Justice Alito warned about, I have no idea. Our people and our neighbors are welcome to marry in our building. They just need to conform to our rules for marriage as we see fit in the bible. They are to conduct their legal marriage contract off of church property, preferably by a magistrate. Residents of Great Britain have already been doing that for a long time.
|
|
|
|
Marriage and the Local Church
Dr. John M. Asquith 9/20/22 - 6 min read
Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge, Hebrews 13:4.
The Lord has a wonderful plan to prevent fornication. It's called marriage; Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband, 1st Corinthians 7:2. There is a great liberation for women in that verse. No longer does a woman need to endure sharing a husband with a rival wife. Let every woman have her own husband.
This was not a new ruling by Paul the Apostle. As usual, he has taken the Gentiles and explained the scriptures to us. Jesus Christ who among the many things that he was ordained to do, performed the part of that prophet spoken of in Deuteronomy 18:8; I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. Only that prophet, our Lord Jesus Christ had the authority to overrule Moses.
Matthew 19:8 He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.
Matthew 19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.
If the Lord intended men to continue taking more than one wife as the law not only permitted but at times required, then a man taking a second wife after putting away his first one would not be committing adultery. Why would it be adultery for him to have two living wives? David did. Many did. It was the norm. In other passages Jesus Christ made it clear that a divorced woman taking another husband committed adultery. Women were not allowed to have more than one husband in the same manner that a man could have more than one wife.
But, in Matthew 19:9 he extends the defintion of adultery to the husband who not only is guilty of causing his wife to commit adultery, but he himself has now committed adultery. Clearly, Jesus Christ has overridden Moses. The Apostle Paul did not make up a new rule when he said, Let every woman have her own husband. He explained the words of Jesus Christ to us.
For those pastors who have inherited one of the grand old fundamental churches of old and boast of being old fashioned, you probably have enough people who want to continue your charade, lock out the realities of the world around you, and pretend that everything is just as it always was. I have no such luxury here.
I have a friend who is dear to me who pastors in a predominantly Mennonite and Amish area of Pennsylvania. There are no TV signals. Cell phone reception is poor and where it exists rarely will allow for data. To visit there is to step back 15 to 20 years in time. His few divorced people maintain a celibate life style and the great work of demeaning sin that has so swept our culture is kept in better abeyance. I rejoice in such pockets of humanity and a pastor who labors among them.
I hear many pastors who claim to labor in such fields, but upon close examination you see that they can only claim such by locking the doors, squatting in a corner while facing the wall, plugging their ears, squinting just right, and using selective memory. What I have to say is for those who labor in reality.
A pastor today must be able to work with truly broken people and families upon whom all of the spiritual plagues of Egypt have fallen. The great mass of people among whom we labor to make them hear of the grace of Jesus Christ are whores and whoremongers. They are fornicators. They are adulterers. I have a niece who teaches school close to Albany, New York. Out of her class of 40 some students, only a couple of them go home to a traditional family consisting of a mother and a father. A man who would seek to carve out a people for Jesus Christ from among such had better know his bible and have an unlimited capacity for understanding and grace.
The bible definition of a whore is an unmarried woman who is sexually active without commitment. (Read Deuteronomy 22:21 for an example.) Whether or not she receives payment does not alter her status. The male equivalent is called a "whoremonger". I am not ashamed to teach that, but neither am I so callous that I am not sensitive to the connotation given if I just sling those words around. It would be like me telling everyone to go take a break so that they can go "piss". Yes, it is a bible word, but please use your head.
After the initial thrill or acceptance by her peers when a young lady rids herself of her virginity, the depression and miseries of that life can be crippling. Young girls no longer speak of losing their virginity. They get rid of it. An old Country song from 30 or 40 years ago said, "it ain't easy being easy". The women that I have had pass through the doors of my church and who have given themsleves over to that life have been truly miserable.
It takes a pharmaceutical industry, all of Hollywood, teams of counselors, rock stars, and self delusion to make them feel at all normal. Little did they realize when they first subscribed to opening their feet to some young man, that their self esteem, their sense of well-being, their mental health, and emotional equilibrium would all be sacrificed to this new lifestyle. When I see a young lady with garishly died hair, or tattoos, or mutilating piercings, I see a young woman struggling to establish an identity for the person staring back at them from the mirror. I grieve for them.
I am not afraid of them hearing the word "whore". At some point, the law of God needs to penetrate a broken heart. I treat broken sinners who stumble into the house of God as if I was running an emergency room in a hospital. The first rule is, "stabilize the patient". The single mother who has been abandoned for the umpteenth time, the tattooed single lady who struggles with depression and has given up hope of true love, the obese woman who is fodder for a certain element of men who covet their welfare money, and the divorced woman who too easily gives in to her lonely desires, need stabilization. They need a pastor and a church who can give them hope of a better life.
The average pastor doesn't think about it, but his family is a miracle. That is one of the reasons that he is to be a lover of hospitality. It is so good for these broken people to be embraced by such a family. Your failures and victories should be on display. Your triumphs in Christ Jesus should give them hope. Make the bible their friend. Love them just as they are, but show them how to have victory in small things. Your marriage, your walk in Christ Jesus, and the grace of your life need to be on display for hope.
By the time most couples get into the house of God, they have already besmirched themselves with multiple marriages. We treat every marriage as honorable in all, and the bed undefiled regardless of how it came about. At the Black Creek Baptist Church we don't make men who have more than one living woman with whom they have partaken in matrimony into bishops or deacons. That is absolutely the only prohibition. We do not see them as being in sin. They may have been at one time, but they are now saved and ready to serve God. They preach, act as trustees, run ministries and anything else that pleases God.
Then why can't they be bishops or deacons if sin is not the reason? Why can't a woman be a bishop or pastor? Is sin the problem? No, there is a bible prohibition against it that has nothing to do with sin. I can assure you that I have run into problems with men who are on their second or third marriages after having been divorced that are deeper than the average marriage. You say that in your church you ordain men as bishops or deacons who have had multiple women as wives. That is your church. I hope that God blesses you. We will run the Black Creek Baptist church with such light as God gives us.
More than any thing else, I want to see my people find victory in Jesus Christ. Marriage is a great place to find victory but likewise a terrible place to feel defeat. There is healing in the person of Jesus Christ. A pastor who has found that healing and truly yearns for it in his people need to understand the times in which we live and serve the Lord thus.
|
|
|
|
9/14/22 - 6 min read
And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God, 1st Corinthians 6:11.
In their groundbreaking book Hooked: The Brain Science on How Casual Sex Affects Human Development, Drs. Joe S. McIlhaney Jr. and Freda McKissic, explain the devastating effects of how promiscuity and sexual abuse in adolescence affect the entire lives of those involved. They demonstrate through statistical evidence that promiscuous girls have a very small chance of keeping a stable marriage.
Because of the intricate way in which the brain is constructed, humans are a mammalian species which releases chemicals in the brain upon the activation of the libido when a woman pairs to the male who has caused that libido to be aroused. Whether a person is an evolutionist or a creationist, the brilliance of that chemical reaction is seen in the instinctive attraction and bonding that a female has for her mate.
McIlhaney and McKissic who are both practicing gynecologists, never mention God in the entire book. They work from science. Yet, the bible believer sees that wisdom of his bible over and over as they publish their findings. They relate how that by nature a female bonds to her mate by chemical reactions in the brain. Whether that mating was done in a honeymoon suite or in the back seat of a car makes no difference. She has bonded.
When that bonding breaks through death, divorce, or in the case of most adolescent sex when the mate grows bored and moves on, the female is overwhelmed with depression. The authors observe that the only depression greater than divorce is from death. A young 15 year old girl whose first sexual partner leaves her, suffers through a depression equal to that of a woman going through divorce. It's how God made her.
Whereas the divorced woman often has a support structure to help her through her catastrophe, the young girl only has other 15 year olds. There is no condom for the brain. More often than not, she will bond again with some other promiscuous young man before she is fully healed. She is unable to bond as deeply because she never healed. After a few such encounters, the authors liken her to a piece of tape that has been used so many times that it can no longer stick to anything. The Apostle Paul called it, without natural affection, Romans 1:31, 2nd Timothy 3:3.
Males suffer their own way. The bonding is just as real but the effects are different. A male bonded to a woman by a sexual encounter will have a protective spirit towards her. He becomes like a bull in a pasture who will charge anyone he suspects of threatening his mate. Like a lion in the wild, he wants to drag home food. All of this is destroyed by modern thinking. He is called sick and possessive.
After a few sexual encounters he is cured of his possessiveness. He can share his woman with anyone. He can walk away even if they cry after him. He can abandon children. He can laugh if she necks with another woman at the bar.
Surprise Mr. Pastor! these are the people who you will find when you seek to carve out a people for Jesus Christ from out of the neighborhoods near you. The same process that causes a woman to bond to her mate in a sexual encounter is what God designed to bond a woman to her children. A woman when she is in travail hath sorrow, because her hour is come: but as soon as she is delivered of the child, she remembereth no more the anguish, for joy that a man is born into the world, John 16:21.
The brain releases chemicals when a child is in the birth canal that cause the woman to bond to her child. The same thing happens during lactation. The authors find that women who wounded their natural ability to bond through promiscuous sexual activity, has also lost their ability to bond with their children. Sit in a doctors office for a half hour or stand in line in Walmart. women don't like their children. They will do anything to get them into daycare, leave them with grandma, or glue them to some electronic device.
When most of these people come into your church (if you have any clue of how to do that), they have already ruined any chance of having one husband or wife for the rest of their lives. When a woman comes into your church with children by multiple men and is pregnant by her current live-in, and her husband to whom she is still legally married has long ago abandoned her and shacked up elsewhere, can your theology handle that?
You say to me, "If she divorces and remarries, she will be in adultery". Wow! what a revelation! She has been in adultery for years now. If her latest husband divorces her, she is in adultery, if she stays as she is she is in adultery, if she marries her current paramour she is in adultery. Is there any hope for taking this person and stabilizing her life so that her unborn child can have a decent home, her children by other men can have stability, and she can sit in the house of God with any honor?
If you have a God, a King James Bible and a compassion for the utterly destroyed people of your land, there is hope. Never mind what your goody-two-shoes fundamentalist buddies think. Fanny Crosby had better sense about such people than the average fundamentalist. "Deep in the human heart, touched by the tempter, feeling lied buried that grace can restore". "Strings that are broken can vibrate once more".
We have people in The Black Creek Baptist Church who have suffered deeply from the excesses of our day. Many of them were born with two strikes against them by means of their parentage and circumstances of their upbringing. About the first time they ever got to make their own decisions, they heard the world cry out, "Strike three you're out".
Their children are now being raised in holiness. They are free from the depths of depression. Some have a mate who loves them and is pledged to them for life and understands what that means. They have broken the bondage of drugs and alcohol. We have seen drug and alcohol sotted marriages rescued from destruction. We have seen mates who despised each other fall in love.
I say all of this to say, "I hate divorce", but I don't hate it as much as people who have been through it. I hate what the devil has done to our society. I wish that the idiots in their high towers who vote for such destruction and advocate the tearing down of godly foundations could spend some time with me as I go house to house and hold the wretched hearts of those so bruised and hurting from their disastrous policies.
A preacher who seeks to reach people through their consciences (as might have worked a half century ago), will find that consciences don't work in the 21st century. There is too much damage. God has a fall back plan. These people hurt.
Isaiah 1:4 Ah sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a seed of evildoers, children that are corrupters: they have forsaken the LORD, they have provoked the Holy One of Israel unto anger, they are gone away backward.
Isaiah 1:5 Why should ye be stricken any more? ye will revolt more and more: the whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint.
Isaiah 1:6 From the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in it; but wounds, and bruises, and putrifying sores: they have not been closed, neither bound up, neither mollified with ointment.
Isaiah 1:7 Your country is desolate, your cities are burned with fire: your land, strangers devour it in your presence, and it is desolate, as overthrown by strangers.
The people who you encounter in public hurt. They are like the horse that got loose in the grain bin. Their bowels are in agony but there is no ability or sense to stop eating. You have a bible that can show them how to find healing in the little things in their lives that hurt them so. When you have to counsel a young couple that if the wife would kick her ex-boyfriend out of the house and not allow him to sleep on the couch any more, they might not have the same marital troubles, you begin to understand the depths to which our culture has sunk. Any other generation would have instinctively understood that. Don't expect such common sense today.
My people are not bible believers because they understood the translating process or because I taught them manuscript evidence. They believe a King James Bible because it works like the owners manual written by whoever created them. What they try works. It stops the pain. They crowd into church. They weep at the altar. They play the songs of Zion at home. They dress different. They educate their children differently. They change their forms of entertainment.
There is hope if they have a pastor with any sense who can get over his preconceived ideas.
|
|
9/13/22 - 4 min read
Yet ye say, Wherefore? Because the LORD hath been witness between thee and the wife of thy youth, against whom thou hast dealt treacherously: yet is she thy companion, and the wife of thy covenant, Malachi 2:14.
Sooner or later, every pastor needs to settle in his own mind; what is a marriage? I suppose that if you are in a large enough urban area, and you have been there for some time, you may draw enough "like minded people" so that you never need to dirty your hands with the riff raff. You can smugly quote words like "old fashioned" and not worry about it. But, what if you had to go out into a general population and create a congregation of born again believers out of typical 21st century people?
Since that is a skill almost unknown today, most pastors will never need to train the wounded of our day to be bible believing christians. They just keep reshuffling a smaller and smaller cadre of like minded people and shutting their eyes to the degenerating standards and convictions in that shrinking crowd. For those of us who labor among the broken, being able to define the relationships these people have and God's attitude to those relationships becomes crucial.
What is marriage? What is a concubine? What is a whore? What is a whoremonger? Occasionally, I council with a couple who are tentatively attending services. It is not unusual to find out that they have a committed relationship, cohabit, but have never consented to marriage. I explain to the woman that she is a concubine. Quickly, I let her know that I am not insulting her. Solomon and David had concubines and no one would have dared insult any of those women.
For the purposes of the Black Creek Baptist Church, and in harmony with a King James Bible, I label committed sexual relationships that cohabit, a husband and concubine relationship. I explain that they have come to a Baptist pastor for council and that if they want to continue in that council they must get used to bible terms. After all, there are plenty of other councilors out there they can go see. In order to understand the next step, it is important to understand how I see marriage.
Marriage is above all things a covenant between two willing people. Early in my study of the Bible, I was taught that marriage was flesh joining flesh. The verse used for that was 1st Corinthians 6:16; What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh. The problem with that verse is that it does not say that being one flesh is marriage. It certainly wasn't for the woman at the well. For thou hast had five husbands; and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband: in that saidst thou truly, John 4:14.
In Genesis, a woman did not become a wife by becoming one flesh. A man took his wife and then became one flesh. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh, Genesis 2:24. She was his wife first, then became one flesh. I have had people use the example of Isaac taking Rebecca to bed without ceremony as an illustration of flesh joining flesh being all that is necessary. Isaac and Rebecca's marriage is a good place to prove that marriage is a covenant between a consenting man and woman.
Laban expressly asked Rebecca if she would go with Abraham's servant. And they called Rebekah, and said unto her, Wilt thou go with this man? And she said, I will go, Genesis 24:58. She knew exactly what she was getting into and she consented. What about Isaac? Did he just see her and whisk her off to bed? No, he did not. He did not take her into his tent. He took her into his mother's tent. And Isaac brought her into his mother Sarah's tent, and took Rebekah, and she became his wife; and he loved her: and Isaac was comforted after his mother's death, Genesis 24:6. He made her the queen. He gave her his mother's place. There is a covenant there.
What the couple I am counseling lacks is a clear cut covenant that they intend to be husband and wife. I then ask them if they consider themselves to have a covenant. The most common arrangement I see among such couples is two people who swap DNA, share an abode, eat together, are monogamous, but keep separate checking accounts and finances. All the things they share just kind of developed. Each holds out his or her separate finances as their last vestige of independence from the other one.
They get embarrassed when asked if a covenant exists. They aren't ashamed of their sexual relationship. They are embarrassed because the relationship catapulted quickly after they began swapping DNA, but they never or rarely use the "M" word, marriage. I push the "M" word. Are they wasting time in their lives with a sexual and emotional addiction to someone with who they could never form a lasting covenant, or is this person the only person that they would ever want to make such a covenant with? Often they are afraid to discuss it between themselves. I make it my job to push for an answer one way or another.
For the purposes of the Black Creek Baptist Church and in harmony with the King James Bible, we define marriage as a covenant between a man and a woman, made legal in the jurisdiction wherein they dwell, and consummated where physically possible. Whether that marriage is made by two Indians following tribal customs in the Amazon River Basin, two star struck bar hoppers at a magistrate's office, or two christians who come together for the first time after wedding in their home church, it makes no difference. It is a marriage. It is sacred in the eyes of God and must be held sacred by men.
In a further post we will look at divorce, second marriages, adultery and fornication. I hope this helps. I live and work in a real world with a real bible and a real God. Pious platitudes and textbook definitions all too often fall flat when a pastor leaves the security of his church property and wades out into a sea of real people.
|
|
9/12/22 - 5 min read
If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?, Psalms 11:3.
One of the great foundations of a godly society is marriage. To be married is to partake in a grace from God experienced by Adam and Eve before their sin and expulsion from paradise. Therefore it is no surprise that the institution of marriage is under attack. For pastors who still seek to carve out a people for Jesus Christ out of the real world, the general mess that people make of their lives can be vexing. The mess made of marriages is a big part of that vexation.
Never before in Western culture have so many people done so much permanent damage to themselves before turning 25. Getting saved and joining a bible believing church will not remove their tattoos. It will not erase the word "bastard" from their children. It will not erase a criminal record. It will not undo a failed marriage that was abandoned for a new one. As I often tell my people, if you wrote a bad check yesterday, and you get saved today, it will still bounce tomorrow.
What will change is how you react to bouncing a check. As a pastor, I spend much time with people who have grievously entangled their lives. There are no instant cures. A man saved behind bars for a crime will still serve his time. If he is truly saved (a big if nowadays), he will serve his time differently. Other inmates will notice. Likewise, the single mother, the person scarred with tattoos, the couple with the confusing marriage record, the person wounded by the sexual habits of our deviant culture, and the man crippled by a felony record will live their lives differently.
All too often, bible believing churches are full of make-believe. The pulpit is used to mock those wounded by the excesses of our day. When the church doors close and the world is out of sight, what is left of the once burgeoning congregation is all too often people kidding themselves. Whereas they think of their church as pure, their immediate and extended families show the same proportion of busted marriages, tattooed children, drugs and alcohol, sexual deviancy, and whatever else miseries our culture has brought us.
A family that has preserved a truly bible believing lifestyle without hypocrisy and has successfully passed that lifestyle down to another generation is so rare that I rejoice greatly when I see one, and I do know one or two. It is simply impossible to go out into a standard community in our day, carve out a people for Jesus Christ who will come into the house of God lifting up holy hands without wrath or doubting, and not bring in the plagues of this world.
A pastor who cannot compassionately open his King James Bible and guide this new person or family into a joyful life in Christ while exhibiting patience is no pastor at all.
Jude 1:22 And of some have compassion, making a difference:
Jude 1:23 And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh.
Being a pastor to a broken nation has forced me to study subjects that I would have never considered before. I read books on prescription drugs, porn addiction, ADHD, addiction to electronics, and many other topics wherein my people have been snared. I judge what these books say by the words of my King James Bible. I find that for every medical or psychological discipline out there, there is a body of literature by men and women who decry the abuse within those fields.
Remarkably, when these various professionals have critically dissected the errors of their profession, they are more often than not in line with the word of God even though I can find nothing in their professional or personal biographies that identify them as bible believing. In fact some of these people are outright liberals. Being a liberal does not necessarily blind someone to the overreaches of their profession. Authors such as Irving Kirsch, author of The Emperor's New Drugs, or Dr. Leonard Sax, author of Boys Adrift and Girls on the Edge are by no means conservative, but they see through the folly of our day.
It often takes a while to explain to people that a doctor that is $300,000 in debt for his education and an office overhead of $250.00 an hour can not spend much time on a patient for whom he will be given $35.00 by Medicaid. That doctor is perfectly safe in prescribing any of a wide range of drugs. He can't be sued because he followed the drug guidelines. He can't afford to spend any quality time with his patients, and his finances demand that he spend as few minutes as possible, write a prescription and see his next patient.
The poor of this nation and increasingly the middle class (as medicine becomes more socialized) are the victims of this system. We never override a doctor's orders but we do show people a better lifestyle. As they learn a less destructive lifestyle free of adultery, alcohol, and recreational drugs we encourage them to work with their doctor to get off the prescriptions. Most doctors are thrilled. Our people who have been successful at this love the changes.
The institution that has suffered the most from these upheavals is marriage. There is nothing I love more than to see a couple who have lived a committed and healthy relationship with one spouse. I am not so blind as to think that I can build a church with only such people.
Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge, Hebrews 13:4. I have had to make some difficult calls as a pastor to a broken society. I am not asking anyone to agree with my decisions. I am not callous to the opinions of my brethren, but neither am I subject to them. Very few of my fellows work among such people. When they do work with them, they administer a superficial prayer that they call a prayer of faith for salvation. The supplicant offers monopoly money for faith, and receives monopoly money for salvation.
The pastor then assures them that they are truly saved and tries to get them to change. It doesn't work. We have countless people in the Black Creek Baptist Church who once lived depraved lives of addiction, uncleanness, adultery, alcoholism, and the like. Their lives are irrevocably changed. They love being in church. They love singing the old hymns. They give glory to Jesus Christ by whom they have found salvation, hope and an inward witness.
I find it strange that pastors who keep flogging a dead horse and can show no visible results to their soul winning take time to criticize what works. We have a saying here, "They love our cake, but they hate our recipe". Come and visit. Privately interview our people. Follow them to their homes. See if you don't find person after person living a new life in Christ Jesus. Surprise them in the market place, catch them unawares, see if their lives are not consistent from the pew to the public, and to home.
Now try to make sense out of the entangled marital lives they have sown for themselves in the lives they lived prior to the gospel. In my next post, I hope to give some advice that has worked here. Many times I have had to look at the people sitting in our services and cried out along with King Hezekiah, The good LORD pardon every one That prepareth his heart to seek God, the LORD God of his fathers, though he be not cleansed according to the purification of the sanctuary, 2nd Chronicles 30:18,19. Marriage in the Present Upheavals (purecambridgetext.com)
|
|
A Book for the People
For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him, Isaiah 53:2.
We see in Isaiah 53:2 a prophecy of Jesus Christ. Regardless of his value as the long awaited Messiah, and despite his deity, he was not recognized by the scholars. We are reminded of Lord's admonition to Samuel upon showing him the lad David who was to be king. But the LORD said unto Samuel, Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; because I have refused him: for the LORD seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart, 1st Samuel 16:7.
When the scholars did examine Jesus Christ, they got it all wrong.
John 7:43 So there was a division among the people because of him.
John 7:44 And some of them would have taken him, but no man laid hands on him.
John 7:45 Then came the officers to the chief priests and Pharisees; and they said unto them, Why have ye not brought him?
John 7:46 The officers answered, Never man spake like this man.
John 7:47 Then answered them the Pharisees, Are ye also deceived?
John 7:48 Have any of the rulers or of the Pharisees believed on him?
John 7:49 But this people who knoweth not the law are cursed.
The officers who refused to arrest Jesus Christ judged him by his manner of speaking and the words themselves. The Pharisees who made up a large portion of the scholars of that day judged him by their scholarly precepts. They stared their creator in the face. They heard his words. They saw his miracles and yet derided the "little" people as ignorant. If they could have they would have completely redesigned him. The words and the works of Jesus Christ were found wanting in the eyes of the scholars, but wrought life in the common people.
Why should we expect the reception of his words to be different? In what generation have the scholars been correct? Even in 1611, the King James Bible was roundly criticized by the academic community upon its release. Bible historian Gordon Campbell in his book Bible: The Story of the King James Version 1611-2011, recounts the hostile reception that established Puritans and other scholars gave it.
The great exception to that criticism was 17th century historian and clergyman Thomas Fuller. Forty-five years after its publication, he based his positive reception of the King James Bible by its effect upon the people. He praised the assembled translators who he said, "rolled away the stone from the mouth of the well of life, so that now even Rachels, weak women, may freely come, both to drink themselves and to water their families at the same".
How different the King James Bible looks to a congregation of simple people redeemed from sin than it looks to some high-brow scholar! He judges by such whims as he has cultivated as he learns less than 10% of the linguistic skills of the King James translators. Our congregations judge by the great work of God in their lives, by the liberty wrought in their beings, and by their joy at learning.
In the many books that I have read about the Wright Brothers and their invention of the airplane, I came across an account of their first demonstration in France. The top French glider pilot of his day and a man earnestly endeavoring to make a flying machine looked at their craft. As the Wright Brothers prepped it for flight, he explained to the assembled multitude why the whole proceeding was a sham. He broke down what he saw in their craft and piece by piece explained as an expert why such a machine could never fly.
He held the peoples' attention until the airplane lifted off from the ground and flew over their heads. Our churches are full of people who have had the experts explain just how bad our King James Bible really is. Then they heard it preached by a man who trusted it and believed it. Like the crowd in France, they turn their backs on the know it all, and shout huzzahs and wave their hats at the miracle before them.
The great joke of the modern versions is that the more educated a person is, the higher the likelihood that they use a new version, and yet they invoke the ignorance of the "little" people as their excuse for dumbing down their versions. It is the butcher, the baker, the candlestick maker, and all those who judge by the words themselves who trust that book. Meanwhile, the scholars keep rewriting the bible hoping to get it right.
|
|
BIBLE STUDY - INTERPRETATION - WORD STUDIES - DOCTRINE
Read Study Learn Teach Mentor Train for Christ
Did Blayney Retranslate?
Dr. John M. Asquith 23 hours ago 4 min read 08/23/22
Moreover it is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful, 1st Corinthians 4:2.
It has now been more than a decade since my wife and I made our series of treks to the New York Branch of the American Bible Society to examine their extensive collection of King James Bibles. At the time, my principal purpose was to identify the the origins of the Pure Cambridge Text as we know it today.
Because their library contains the largest collection of bibles in North America, and because they have preserved generations of bibles in climatically controlled vaults, we were able to examine bibles printed hundreds of years ago. Using the Herbert Catalogue of Printed Bibles: 1525-1961 we identified copies of the 1629 Cambridge Bible (Herbert Catalogue #433 printed in 1630), the 1638 Cambridge Bible (Herbert #520), The Bishop Lloyd Bible of 1701 (Herbert #867), the F. S. Paris Bible 0f 1762, both editions (Herbert #1142 and #1143), and the Blayney Bible of 1769 (Herbert #1196).
We also examined subsequent printings done by The Cambridge University Press as J. Archdeacon their printer slowly conformed the Cambridge Bible to the Oxford (Blayney Bible). By just randomly pulling Oxford Bibles off of the shelf as they were sequentially placed according to their year of printing, we were able to identify the current Oxford Text printed today as having originated between the 1893 and 1894 printings.
We were not able to ascertain the advent of the current Cambridge Text because the American Bible Society did not have a similar row of Cambridge Bibles printed at the time of the two University Printers' divergence. It took subsequent detective work using pamphlets printed at Cambridge's celebratory 300th centennial of printing the King James Bible, statements made by The New York Office of the Cambridge University Press in 1985, a letter written to David Norton, the three volume history of the Cambridge University Press by David McKitterick, and A.W. Pollard's book Records of the English Bible.
These things are documented in my book, Further Thoughts on the Word of God: Revised Edition.
As we collated the several versions, it became more and more obvious that each of the editors who sought to purify the printed text of the bible over the years did not start from scratch. Quite often we would see a misprint in one bible that was carried over into the next generation of printed bibles. Each editor showed consistent evidence of using a King James Bible or group of King James Bibles sitting before them as opposed to using the underlying Greek and Hebrew texts.
Recently, Steve Avery, one of the Administrators of the King James Bible Debate on Facebook contacted me concerning an error in the 1769 Blayney Bible. He pointed out that Blayney failed to correct a misprint from the 1611 printing of the King James Bible in Genesis 18:27. When Blayney saw the verse in the 1611, it read; And Abraham answered and said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the LORD, which am but dust and ashes. King James Bibles today read Lord.
That was a printer's error. Abraham did not use the term Jehovah there. Spelling LORD with all upper case letters is how the King James Translators signaled their readers that they had translated the word Jehovah. Had Blayney gone back to the original Hebrew to translate, he would not have used all capital letters. Genesis 18:27 is direct internal evidence that Blayney did not retranslate the bible. He copied what was in front of him. When the source bibles that he used all had the same printers' error, he copied that error.
As he said in his letter explaining his work, he used an original 1611 bible, the Bishop Lloyd Bible of 1701, and the F.S. Paris Bible of 1762. He collated those three bibles to get his bible. He specifically stated that he only used Greek and Hebrew to make sure the use of italics was accurate and to improve readings in the margin which gave the translation of words copied directly out of the Greek and Hebrew into the text of our King James Bible.
Anathema Maranatha of 1st Corinthians 16:22 being an example of such. The translators chose to copy the exact words of Paul into the bible without translating them. Blayney gave a translation of such in the margin.
Benjamin Blayney did not retranslate the bible in giving us the 1769 Oxford Bible. His own words and countless internal evidences are available to demonstrate that. That will not stop the shallowly educated scholars of our day from repeating it, but it can be demonstrated to any and all who desire truth.
It remains a mystery to me how and when the King James Bibles of the later half of the 19th century corrected that defect. A bible printed by Cambridge in the late 1800s that I have kept on my shelf has the correct reading. Until Steve Avery pointed out Genesis 18:27, I had been under the impression that it read just like the Blayney Bible and in most places it does. The King James Bible Debate on Facebook with its contributors, and its very able administrators is an invaluable contribution to the understanding of the King James Bible. Did Blayney Retranslate? (purecambridgetext.com)
|
|
Fearing the Apocrypha
Lions and tigers and bears, oh my!
Dorothy in the Wizard of Oz
A favorite objection to the King James Bible is its inclusion of the Apocrypha in its printings well into the 19th century. By the Apocrypha we mean 14 books which Protestants and Baptists often find historically interesting but by no means do they find them to be part of the canon of scripture. The Catholic Church and Eastern Orthodox churches accept them as part of the bible itself.
Yes, the King James Bible did include the Apocrypha in its printing and the translators took great care to translate those 14 books. Knowing the fables and partially accurate histories of the Apocrypha were considered essential to a well rounded education in 1611 and well into the next two centuries. Because of the general shallowness of a bible college education today, ministers who seek to encourage the use of modern bibles often use the inclusion of the Apocrypha in the 1611 as an excuse to discourage people from using the King James Bible.
What does the word "apocrypha" mean? The very term "Apocrypha" is a slap in the face to the Roman Catholic Bible. The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) defines the word Apocrypha as: Of unknown authorship; not authentic, spurious; uncanonical. To be apocryphal is defined as: Of doubtful authenticity; spurious, fictitious, false; fabulous, mythical. By labeling those 14 books as "The Apocrypha", the King James Translators defied the Council of Trent and the authority of the Roman Catholic Church.
At the Council of Trent (1546) the Roman Church labeled those books as "Deuterocanonical". In the OED Deuterocanonical means: Of, pertaining to, or constituting a second or secondary canon: opposed to protocanonical.
Applied historically to those books of the Scripture Canon as defined by the Council of Trent which are regarded by Roman Catholic divines as constituting a second Canon, accepted later than the first, but now of equal authority.
Bible publishers have a long history of including various helps between the covers of their bibles. We find timelines, dictionaries, concordances and for the first two centuries of the printing of the King James Bible we could often find the Apocrypha. It was labeled as "Apocrypha". Its very label instructed the reader that the books therein were "of unknown authorship; not authentic, spurious; uncanonical".
Cease, my son, to hear the instruction that causeth to err from the words of knowledge, Proverbs 19:27. As the bible colleges and seminaries churn out an unceasing train of poorly educated twits and foist them on an unsuspecting public as preachers, it becomes more and more important for bible believers to find sources of history and bible which go deeper than the silliness which passes for education today.
|
|
BIBLE STUDY - INTERPRETATION - WORD STUDIES - DOCTRINE
Read Study Learn Teach Mentor Train for Christ
|
|
Neither Oldest Nor Best (A Book Review)
Say not thou, What is the cause that the former days were better than these? for thou dost not enquire wisely concerning this, Ecclesiastes 7:10.
David H. Sorenson with whom I disagree on the inspiration of the King James Bible has nevertheless wrought a great work in the field of textual criticism with his book, Neither Oldest Nor Best. The King James Bible is attacked on three main fronts. It is accused of using outmoded English words that distort the meaning. It is accused of poor translation of the underlying texts, and it accused of using inaccurate texts from which it was translated.
I and many others have demonstrated repeatedly that the words of a King James Bible are timeless and that the charge that its vocabulary is confusing because of language shifts is a trite and baseless claim. The translation of the English words speak for themselves. They infallibly point their readers to the God of Abraham and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ.
All too often the issue of whether or not the King James translators had the correct text of the bible from which to translate is hammered home from youth up . It seems that from Kindergarten Sunday school class all through college, students are taught that the new translations use the oldest and best texts of ancient scripture.
Dr. Sorenson has shattered that myth. With simple to understand pictures and with great patience he exposes the two supposedly oldest manuscripts from which the new versions draw their claim of better accuracy. The two manuscripts that so excited the 19th century are in reality nothing better than Joseph Smith's golden tablets from which he created the myths of Mormonism.
|
|
7/19/22
·
I was recently contacted by a person who took some objection to my recent post titled Whence Cometh Perspective?. The comments probably also apply to its follow up post, What in the World is the World?. I appreciate the comments because they honor the text of the King James Bible. I disagree with the conclusions of the comments, but not because the commenter dishonored the word of God. Instead, I disagree with his application of the textual references used.
This is what good brethren do. They agree on a final authority and dig into what it says. A Jew once told me, "I love King James Bible believers. You are like Jews, you argue over the smallest minutia." A good Jew never doubts his text, he doubts the wisdom of the Jew standing next to him to interpret it correctly. Likewise, I have found a rich trove of fellow King James Bible believers who are willing to give up any doctrine or creed if the King James Bible disagrees with that particular doctrine or creed when examined in context and examined with the intended hearer in mind.
|
|
www.purecambridgetext.com
Further Thoughts on the Word of God, - John M. Asquith,
|
|
Favorites
·
“When we read the writings of George Washington or Patrick Henry, we do not read King James Bible English. Their everyday language was much closer to ours. The books of Edgar Allen Poe or James Fennimore Cooper are not written in the English of 1611. Abraham Lincoln or Robert E. Lee did not grow up speaking English as it was spoken in the 17th century yet none of them has trouble reading he King James Bible. The educators of their day believed in making their students smarter to match their Bible. Today’s educators believe in making their Bibles stupider to match their students. By all accounts, both achieve their objective.” John M. Asquith, Further Thoughts on the Word of God, p.119
|
|
Favorites
·
“The King James Bible is the Word of God. The greatest thing that any preacher could ever do for himself would be to quit worrying about it. Just use it. Quit trying to second-guess what it says. Quit throwing it aside every time a contradiction seems to appear. Moses approached the burning bush because it was a contradiction. It was clearly on fire but it was not consumed. He didn’t walk away in frustration. Instead, he drew closer and found the depths of God. To the Bible student who has accepted the King James Bible, contradictions are an invitation. They are not evidence of a weak Bible. They are evidence of the student’s ignorance. Like the burning bush, the inexplicable draws us to take a closer look. While others run to lexicons and commentaries, the Bible believer prays and searches deeper. God reveals himself in those searches.” John M. Asquith, Further Thoughts on the Word of God, p.124
|
|
·
“From time to time, I am forced to deal with the issue of creation versus evolution. Once in a while, I have had to counter the subtle teachings of humanism. The greatest and most persistent challenge that I have run into is neither of those. It is the almost universally taught lie that there is no perfect Bible….For every college professor who smirked at the story of Jonah or challenged the creation account, there have been a thousand Sunday school teachers that have taught that there is no perfect Bible. There was a time when only seminarians had access to the instrument of textual criticism that ultimately destroyed confidence in the AV 1611. Today, in the very lowest grammar school grades, it is found necessary to indoctrinate young minds with the same infidelity.” John M. Asquith, Further Thoughts on the Word of God, p.116
|
|
·
There is really no aspect of Bible scholarship wherein a person cannot abundantly prove the perfection of the King James Bible. The proofs are out there if a person is not so pridefully invested in the fables of doubt. If a person understands that, with patience and wisdom some skeptics can be brought to that understanding. In 40 years I have won over a few, but only a few.
I have been far more successful in convincing sinners from the general populace who when shown that there really is a perfect Bible on this earth and that they can read and understand it, they rejoice. They begin to attend to its words and in so doing become convinced of the righteousness of God, their own sin, and the grace of God through Jesus Christ.
In other words, I have seen God make more Bible believers from out of the general population, than out of the body of supposed believers. For the many that I have seen God convert in this manner, they are solid King James Bible believers who have trouble seeing how people could be so deceived as to doubt the very words of God.
|
|
·
“Preachers who should be earnestly contending for the faith are all too often engaged in the sideshow of making subtle alterations to the AV 1611 to make it fit their own theology. This is Hell’s work not God’s. What has a preacher really taught his people, if after uplifting the Word of God in their eyes, he then makes it subject to his theology in their sight?” John M. Asquith, Further Thoughts on the Word of God, p.186
·
“The average church using the new versions has been forced to allow a steady succession of worldly changes to keep youth interested. Today’s youth pastors have pierced eyebrows, shaved heads, chains about their necks and play hinny-wiggle music to keep their charges coming. Their Bibles have no power to do so. Every year we hear of another old institution that has been forced to accept dancing, mixed swimming and lax dress codes to keep its student body.” John M. Asquith, Further Thoughts on the Word of God, p.117
|
|
·
“In my twenty-two years of salvation I have yet to hear anyone who changed the wording of the King James Bible because he felt compelled by the Greek. Every single change I have ever heard attempted, and I have heard many, was made because the text the preacher was reading did not as fully support the preacher’s current point or doctrine. The preacher then reached into the Greek and found a justification to exalt his point of view…Not being fluent in the Greek language, but only having access to lexicons, makes a preacher able to rationalize any correction he wants to make.” John M. Asquith, Further Thoughts on the Word of God, pp. 52-53
|
|
“Cutting through the noise, both pro, and con, the debate about the absolute authority and the excellence of the KJV really comes down to faith.” Paul W. Scott, English for Bible Readers, p121
|
|
|
“Many of the new versions, built upon dubious manuscripts, attack the Deity of Christ and the efficacy of His blood. By their promotion for lucre and copywriting for control, they all place doubt upon the veracity of God’s word. For example, the International Council of Religious Education, ‘to protect the text from unauthorized changes,’ copyrighted a new version in 1928; then it was changed in 1937, 1946, and finally ‘authorized’ in 1951. It would seem these ‘protected’ Bibles aren’t as stable and reliable as the unprotected text of the KJV, which can be freely copied and distributed. In the meantime, the Authorized Bible, the tried and true word of God, continues to honor the Lord and affect the souls of men.” Paul W. Scott, English for Bible Readers, pp.14,15
|
|
·
“I strongly urge both believer and doubter to approach the Bible – especially the supposed difficult epistles such as Hebrews – with a grammar first mentality. This will keep you from being boxed in, or proverbially painted into a corner. You can glide through and comprehend the meaning without cutting and pasting chapters or passages into another time zone, or reducing the text to hypothetical prattle. It’s not necessary to pour through commentaries or seek out expert in Greek and Hebrew: the answers to all of life’s vital questions are in plain sight within the English text.” Paul W. Scott, English for Bible Readers, p.122
|
|
“Because some KJV verbs may be considered archaic and difficult, the average student may ask, ‘Why bother?’ The answer is simple: we should neither be average, nor should we consider the diligent and correct interpretation of Scripture a bother. Determining what the action was, or is, and when the action happened, or is happening, helps tremendously in comprehending the meaning of the Scripture. Moreover, correct comprehension leads to sound doctrine, which in turn leads to sound action by the believer.” Paul W. Scott, English for Bible Readers, p80
|
|
·
“…some believe the actual word of God is inaccessible to the layman—perhaps it’s found only in heaven; or, if the word of God is actually found on earth, then it’s in the form of carefully preserved and archived fragments, accessible to only a few brilliant experts who can comprehend detached languages. We don’t believe either of those scenarios. We do believe the actual word of God is available, and is becoming available, to the billions of desperate souls that live upon the entire circumference of the globe; we believe it is accessible in an excellent fashion; and we also believe that we should become scholars of the language we presently find it in, Early Modern English, before pouring over commentaries, lexicons, and additional study books.” Paul W. Scott, English for Bible Readers, pp.26,27
|
|
“Understanding simple pronouns sheds light upon a disputed passage…A regular working man, with or without letters before or after his name, can (and should) read his Bible and solve the problems the so-called experts trip over, by applying simple and overt English grammar.” Paul W. Scott, English for Bible Readers, p.69
|
“When we read our Bible, we’ll often find words and phrases that seem difficult or puzzling to us. Don’t simply skip over them or mentally delete them, but rather seek to understand and gain a full comprehension of the text. Ask yourself, ‘What does it mean?’ Write down difficult words or phrases, and then, when they are understood after careful study, write the definition in the margin of your Bible, next to the word or phrase. You will always improve the process of understanding by discipline, patience, and hard work.” Paul W. Scott, English for Bible Readers, p.45
|
|
·
“The common complaints about the KJV being difficult to read due to the pronouns thee, thou, thy, thine, and ye, are objections based in ignorance. These precise words, when understood, actually clarify and precisely define the text. It’s also grammatically incorrect to simply replace the ‘old’ pronouns with you. When God speaks through His word, we know exactly whom He is addressing because there is no mistaking the clarity of the KJV’s English.” Paul W. Scott, English for Bible Readers, pp. 60, 57
·
“The expectation was, and still is, that the Authorized Version would be the literary standard for the increasingly educated masses to attain and adhere to; the Bible would not be deliberately lowered to the vocabulary and idioms of the day. Therefore, it remains incumbent upon the student not to seek the latest Bible fashion, but rather to achieve an understanding of God’s word through the toil of diligent study and prayer.” Paul W. Scott, English for Bible Readers, pp.44-
1
|
|
|
Paul Scott 2 min read 05/17/2022
Spake or Spoke
“…Never man spake like this man” (John 7:46).
“God, who at sundry times and divers manners spake in time past…” (Hebrews 1:1).
At a recent event, while reading the KJV in public, the reader unconsciously replaced spake with spoke. Later, I mentioned it to him, asking him if his Bible had spake or spoke — it had spake . “Spake or spoke…it’s the same, right? What difference does it make?” was his reply. It makes an interesting study:
The modern bibles apparently have replaced the ‘archaic’ spake with spoke; yet the word ‘spoke’ is not used once in the KJV. Some dictionaries pile on, characterizing the word spake as archaic. What’s going on?
______________________________________________________
Spake is the simple past tense of the verb to Speak: An action of verbalizing words which was started and was completed in the past.
Spoke is a rod, bar, or cord, connecting the center of a wheel (hub) to its outer edge (rim).
Using spoke as a verb, indicates the action of repairing a wheel or extending a rod from the hub to the rim: “he spoke the wagon wheel.”
Here, again, the KJV is correct and accurate to distinguish the verbs (in past simple tense). To the point: it would be incorrect to write “Never man spoke like this man” - when the man was actually verbalizing truth and not necessarily repairing a wheel.
Never man spoke like this man - Wow! That guy has a way with wheels!
Never man spake like this man - Wow! That guy has a way with words!
The translators knew how to use spoke (spoken): “…Hath in these last days spoken…” (Hebrews 1:2). As the present perfect tense — an action that began in the past and yet continues to the present; and as the past perfect tense (was spoken) — a series of actions, one started and finished before another. Here, it is clearly a tense of the verb to speak. Interesting.
Is the KJV grammar actually archaic, or is it in fact, perfectly accurate? Never man spake like this man.
|
|
·
“I am not implying that those who use a lexicon are devil possessed or have impure motives. I do, however, strongly suggest that the English-speaking student set aside the auxiliary study sources and make English a priority. First and foremost, become an expert in English to discover, without doubting or gainsaying, the Spirit-given nuggets found in the Book we all can examine, read, and believe.” Paul W. Scott, English for Bible Readers, p.39
·
“Q: What about the people of the world who don’t speak English—should we (English speakers) tell them we have God’s word and they don’t?
A: I wish the missionaries of the world could find unity in this, but they are divided and so the progress is hindered. First, if you are concerned about discouraging the non-English speakers with a remark like, ‘We know English and you don’t,’ then the last thing you’d want to say is, ‘The original Greek says…the Hebrew reads…actually the Aramaic….’ They can readily learn English (especially if you will help them), but should they also learn Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic? That’s discouraging!
Second, this has become a moot issue because they will ask you for the KJV. I’ve heard this request many times: ‘Please use the old English Bible: it’s more descriptive than our version and more interesting than the modern English bibles the other foreigners use. Just speak slowly and explain the meanings of the words.’ If the missionaries could explain the grammar of the KJV, they wouldn’t need to create a schism, a heresy.” Paul W. Scott, English for Bible Readers, pp.128-129
5/05/2022
“The thee and thou language used in the Authorized Version is occasionally used as an excuse to remain ignorant or to sell other modern versions by casting doubt on the usefulness of the A.V. (Authorized Version – KJV). The best defense from the snare of proud doubters and Bible revisionists, who would place themselves above God’s word, is an equipped, educated saint.” Paul W. Scott, English for Bible Readers
|
|
|
|
|
An Introduction to: Paul Scott
English for Bible Readers
by Paul W. Scott
English for Bible Readers
Copyright @ 2008 Paul Scott
Unless otherwise indicated, all Scripture quotations are taken from the King James Bible.
ISBN: 978-0-692-00076-2
Cover design by Grant Miller
For more information or additional copies, please contact: Paul Scott at 746 Norton Street Rochester, NY 14621 at pwscott61@gmail.com
Printed in the United States by Morris Publishing" 3212 East Highway 30 Kearney, NE 68847 1-800-650-788
|
|
05/03/2022
“The King James Version of the Bible (KJV) stands alone in English literature; it continues to be the crown jewel of written communication. Unfortunately, due to our unfamiliarity with its prose and its supposed archaic words, it also stands unused, scarcely read, and relegated to brief exercise on Sunday morning.
Or, worse yet, it’s piled upon the dusty heap of other seldom read classics.”
|
|
5/04/2022
·
“…God communicates to us specifically by His word, and His word is pure. Our job is not to doubt or destroy it, but rather to study, understand, and obey it. We need not follow apocryphal visions or obscure scripts, nor do we need feelings or repetitive customs to define our final authority for matters of faith and practice. We have God’s word. This specific word, translated at the threshold of ubiquitous English influence and with supernatural accuracy, is published in the world’s language, revealing God to whosoever will know him.”
|
|
|
Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls, James 1:21.
James starts this verse with a command predicated on the previous statement that; the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God, vs.20. We are to be something new in this world and we are to be; slow to speak, slow to wrath, vs.19. Those two admonitions are in themsleves good definitions of meekness. However, he didn't just tell us to be meek, he instructed us how to be meek.
Lay apart all filthiness. This is the first part of the command with which James instructs us. Already, if my readers are a random sampling of fundamental Christians of the 21st century, we have hit a stumbling block. In poll after poll, and with many samplings, the gross statistic that 72% of fundamental Christian men view pornography on a weekly basis keeps coming up.
30 years ago, Dr. James Dobson gave the troubling statistic than when polled, 50% of men attending Fundamental or Evangelical Churches admitted to having viewed pornography in the previous seven days. That was 30 years ago before the advent of smart phones, tablets and easy recourse to high speed internet. I listened to a home school seminar conducted by Michael Pearl over 20 years ago. In a message preached to the men who took the time to travel to such a seminar with their families, Brother Pearl preached against pornography. With heads bowed and eyes closed, he stated that over half of the men had raised their hands as having a real problem with it. Again, that was before the advent of the ubiquitous smart phone.
If you or someone you know is in that 72% of men trapped in filth, please watch the attached podcast by Pastor Jack Young of the Lighthouse Baptist Church of Webster, NY. (Click Here) There are a few excellent churches in the Greater Rochester area. Jack Young may not be the best pastor in the Greater Rochester Area and his church may not be the best, but I can assure you that there are none better.
In the next post, we will continue to deconstruct James 1:21. A note to those few Hyper Diaper Dispensationalists (not all dispensationalists, only those who can't figure out that both Paul and James hated filth) who may need to enter a safe room in order to read this, if you are troubled with filth, let down your guard and get some help. I hope that as we deconstruct James 1:21, the beauty and accuracy of your King James Bible will become more real to you.
CLICK THESE LINKS BELOW:
|
|
Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls, James 1:21.
We looked briefly at lay apart all filthiness in the verse, and we commented that it is the first half of the admonition. The second part tells us to, lay aside all superfluity of naughtiness. Here we have two words that the new versions have avoided at all costs and as a result, give us a different command.
NIV: Therefore, get rid of all moral filth and the evil that is so prevalent and humbly accept the word planted in you, which can save you.
ESV: Therefore put away all filthiness and rampant wickedness and receive with meekness the implanted word, which is able to save your souls.
Thanks to these two versions, we now know what the verse does not say. What then is superfluity? It is the root word of superfluous, something that is not needed. Superfluous is the adjective, superfluity is the noun. The Apostle Paul when considering how the Corinthians had shown themselves willing to give abundantly, called his charge to them superfluous. It wasn't really needed. It was unnecessary because they already were obeying it. For as touching the ministering to the saints, it is superfluous for me to write to you:, 2nd Corinthians 9:1.
What then is naughtiness? It is a noun that comes from the adjective naught. And the men of the city said unto Elisha, Behold, I pray thee, the situation of this city is pleasant, as my lord seeth: but the water is naught, and the ground barren, 2nd King 2:19. The context shows us that there were springs of water but that the water was bad. Jeremiah outright defines the word. One basket had very good figs, even like the figs that are first ripe: and the other basket had very naughty figs, which could not be eaten, they were so bad, Jeremiah 24:2.
Something that is naught or naughty is something bad. What James is telling us is that we are to lay aside all superfluity of naughtiness. In other words, the useless and often redundant bad things in our lives. Church members today are utterly wrapped up in junk that cannot profit and is utterly useless to the Kingdom of God, their spiritual welfare and is in fact harming them.
I am not against video games on phones. I have however observed people who are bogged down in them. They have become naughty and they are useless to those people. There are readers of this blog who have weirdo little habits that they would be ashamed to be seen doing in public. Get rid of that naughty superfluous junk! Our King James Bible did not call it rampant or prevalent as the two silly bibles called it. Our bible said that if its redundant or not needed and it is bad, get rid of it.
CLICK THESE LINKS BELOW:
|
|
Deconstructing James 1:21: Wrapping it Up.
Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls, James 1:21.
We have seen in the last two posts on James 1:21 how that he gave a command to lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness. Now we will look at the second part of that command which says; receive with meekness the engrafted word which is able to save your souls. I have written at some length on the definition of meekness. In particular there is a post from 2018 which applies the word meekness to James 1:21. (Click Here)
What then is the engrafted word? Before we look at that, we shall deconstruct another bible word to show how it is done. The word "grave" can be a verb in your King James Bible. And thou shalt take two onyx stones, and grave on them the names of the children of Israel:, Exodus 28:9. To grave is to dig. When someone has begun to grave on something, they become an engraver making an engraving. The onyx stone upon which they graved has become an engraved stone.
Now, consider the engrafted word. The root word is graff. For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree?, Romans 11:24. Those of us who have been graffed onto that tree have become an engrafted people.
Throughout most of the Book of Acts, the Apostles were writing scripture. But the word of God grew and multiplied, Acts 12:24. These writings which encompass the gospels, the Book of Acts itself, the epistles and eventually the Book of Revelation were graffed onto existing scripture. They were graffed onto paper. They are the engrafted word and James wanted his readers to know that if they indeed were to; lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, they could have their souls delivered.
I preach this to Gentiles in our present age. I know this distresses the hyper diaper dispensationalists who breathlessly pant, "It's written to the twelve tribes, It's written to the twelve tribes". Yes, it was written to the twelve tribes because they needed to repent. When I find people in my community who need to repent, I preach that to them. It hasn't hurt a one of them.
As a result I have a church bulging with families who only a few years ago cared nothing for the things of God and who were miserably wrapped up in sin. These people never miss the house of God, love the songs of Zion, and rejoice at their new lives in Christ Jesus. Meeting three times a week is not enough for them so we meet on Wednesdays for a message and prayer, then again Thursday night for bible study. The hyper diaper perfectionists sit around in small sterile groups and send out infinite Facebook posts on which bible books they can ignore.
CLICK THESE LINKS BELOW:
|
|
The Translators and What They Knew
And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation, John 11:51.
Here we have Caiaphas's prophecy. More than likely Caiaphas burns in hell today. He certainly had no faith while he uttered the above words and yet what he spoke is listed not just as divine scripture, it is accurate prophecy. Did Caiaphas know that he was adding to the word of God when he spoke? Of course he did not. I am not the first person to use Caiaphas as an example of someone who gave us infallible scripture without knowing that he did so. I am also not the first person to point out that whether or not the King James translators knew that they gave us an infallible inspired bible has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not they did.
In the last week, I have had a couple of people bring up the translators' own writing to try to dispel any notion that they could have been inspired. They themselves advocated the notion that better understanding could come from the reading of many translations, yet it is they who said they had given us not just one more translation, but "one more perfect translation". Whether or not the King James Bible is the perfect word of God does not rest in the opinion of its translators. It rests on the word itself.
The greatest single resource available today for the bible believer who would understand the various versions of the bible through the centuries and how our King James Bible became what it is today, is the website kept by Will Kinney; www.brandplucked.webs.com. Will Kinney is in his 80s and it is a grace from God to the people of God that he is still active. (It is also a bane to those who would tamper with our bible.) The first video offered on his website is the single greatest explanation that I have ever heard on why the King James Bible can be the perfect word of God. (Here).
I heartily recommend that as many of us who want to know the vast body of information out there and available to begin studying the resources on his site. I don't agree with some theological stands that Mr. Kinney takes, but never at any point does Will Kinney ever twist the written word to make it say something different. If you don't like his theology, grow up. Enjoy the great fruits of his many years of study.
The greatest single resource available today for the bible believer who would understand the various versions of the bible through the centuries and how our King James Bible became what it is today, is the website kept by Will Kinney; www.brandplucked.webs.com.
|
|
"I just read this article for the third time and I, just have to, post it again!"
Announcement from Dr. John M. Asquith
4/11/2022 reposted 4/15/2022
Brother Mike Sutherland has set about to edit and categorize the 500 or more posts contained in this blog. His hope is to prepare manuscript that can be published in an ebook or even paperback form. He has tasked me with reviewing them with the goal of being able to cross reference each post by specific category. As I reread the following post from 2017, I thought that it would be good to repost it. Our readership is far broader than it was 5 years ago and many have not seen this introduction.
________________________________________________________
For those of us who believe in divine intervention in the affairs of men, the issue of whether or not God helped preserve the word of God should not be difficult to swallow. I know people who believe that in our time God and God alone still selects who should be saved and who should be damned, but those same people think that God preserving his word is too extreme for any sensible person to believe. I know people who believe that a man elected by cardinals from within a select group of themselves can be imbued with an infallibility that God is bound to respect if he should speak ex-cathedra, (that is within his position and seat), and yet these same people think that Jesus keeping his promise to preserve his word is somehow pushing things too far.
I know people who believe that men and women in churches today can prophesy with Holy Ghost anointing and accuracy, but are suspicious of God's willingness to preserve a perfect bible. I know people who claim the guidance of God in their daily decision making, but somehow can't see a role for God in preserving his word. In each of these cases we have men and women making decisions about church membership, church rules, church decisions or policy and everyday life who attribute their decisions to God. What they all have in common is a deep suspicion of anyone who claims to be led by the written word of God.
There are many reasons for this. Foremost is an almost universal belief that there is no perfect bible. Secondly, there is the common assumption that the bible contradicts itself and that those pulling ideas out of its pages do so with a prejudice of aforethought that makes their findings suspect. In other words, in a book too diverse and written by too many men over too long of a period of time, and a book that has suffered the tampering of countless men over the millennia, anyone can prove anything they want by highlighting one text over another. They are buttressed in that belief by the existence of many people who do just that.
Since men of my ilk are often tarred with that brush let me say a few things. First of all I do not want to believe anything that requires me to dampen or even suppress a part of my intellect. In my lifetime I have heard many plausible theologies and other theories that seemed pretty reasonable if the hearer was to squint just right when he looked at the facts. In fact almost every religion on this earth is filled with adherents who feel religiously bound to keep squinting and feel guilty when they don't. I personally hate that. The day when my people need to squint and cock their heads just right to believe what I am saying is the day I need to quit.
The very week that I write this has seen articles trumpeting the finding of the oldest fossil known to man. It is a one celled fossil. Doesn't anyone wonder where the two celled fossils are? Imagine how many years one celled life must have been the predominant life form on earth, and imagine how many eons were involved in the evolution of two celled, four celled, eight celled, sixteen celled, thirty two celled and so on creatures. We live in an age where the science of our day squints and hold their heads just right to pretend that such creatures existed. As an American I wholly uphold the right of any man or woman to squint just right, cock their head and hold such clap trap to be true.
There is no evidence of what they believe, only a heart felt belief that all is well as long as they believe it. Their very world view is shaped by the certainty that they evolved from one celled creatures. These same people look at me as intellectually suspect in that I believe that I was created and that I believe that my creator left me a written record, and that he preserved that record exactly as he promised he would. What they don't understand is that I don't have to squint to believe it.
I don't have the time or the space in this post to argue the infallibility of the bible. What I do want to say is that the book known as the bible, written by many men over 1800 years and passed down to us for 2000 years of history and translated into many languages dead and alive, is absolutely accurate today down to the slightest nuances of text.
If I were to come to you in a secluded spot in the woods and claim that I had driven there in my car, you might think that I lied if you didn't think that any path through the woods was drivable. If I were to demonstrate to you that there was indeed just such a path it would not prove that I was telling the truth, it would merely demonstrate that I could be telling the truth. Your first objection to my statement would have been based on a mistaken belief that no car could have driven to you. Upon seeing that your belief was wrong you must now examine my claim on other grounds.
What I seek to do with these posts is to demonstrate that all of the scholars and clergy who claim that an inerrant transmission of the bible is impossible are wrong. I can demonstrate quite well that the sacred text of the Jews was incorporated into the Gentile Bible along with the New Testament. I can demonstrate quite easily that that same text was quickly and according to scriptural principals rendered in common languages spoken by common people.
The transmission of this text was carried out in Latin, Syrian, Coptic, Gothic and English. The entrenched clergy of our day stand stupefied and scratching their heads while they search through the remnants of old Greek texts much like a befuddled basketball player wondering how his opponent who was streaking in for a layup got by him. These same clergy keep translating their poor warn out texts over and over again with little hope of ever achieving anything they can trust. Meanwhile the great work of God goes forward with vulgar (common language) texts that work.
The English translation known as the King James Bible has a clear and demonstrable path that leads from 1611 until today. Before that, its transmission was from one common tongue to another all the way back to the cross. Even King James Bible professing Baptists stumble at this. Perhaps we will never change their minds. What we will do is demonstrate that they need not put the least part of their intellect on hold to believe it. There is a path and it will run through Cambridge...
|
|
And an highway shall be there, and a way, and it shall be called The way of holiness; the unclean shall not pass over it; but it shall be for those: the wayfaring men, though fools, shall not err therein, Isaiah 35:8.
Whenever I happen to come across this verse in my daily reading, I am reminded again of the grace of our God who has not only chosen to reveal himself and his truths to man, but he has built in a failsafe wherein fools such as myself can free ourselves from error. In the last blog post I dismantled the rather naive assumption that King James Bible believers are some monolithic cult engaged in group-think. Instead, King James Bible believers are those who have entered onto a highway whereon they have a true and valid hope of God straightening out their doctrine.
What we fight for as King James Bible believers is to remove the shackles of man from those seeking the truth. We seek to remove those shackles of inaccurate history, false science, faux translating and just plain ignorance that have kept so many from entering into this liberty that we have found. When I was first introduced to the whole King James Bible issue, I immediately saw it as something seeking to constrict me. When those aforementioned shackles were removed, I took my first tentative steps onto that great highway.
I have had a few guides. I have had the Holy Ghost who has pledged to lead me into all truth. I know that for many that should seem sufficient. It has not been for me. God has placed men in my life who have boosted me. Early on, those men explained that whenever I perceived that they were speaking in accordance with the King James Bible, that I could trust them. They also solemnly warned that wherein they deviated I was to distrust them. I have always thanked God for those men. Thirdly, I have had my own conscience.
That may seem strange to some, but I am sure that many will understand. Holding a King James Bible in my hand and having the Holy Ghost has not kept me free from error. I have had to learn to listen to my own inner voice. In my early days, when I had a preformatted opinion of a verse, the Spirit of God would try to nudge me that something was wrong. I would read a verse, my conscience would be slightly troubled and like the child Samuel, I didn't recognize the voice of God. I had to be trained that the Holy Ghost who wrote the book in front of me now lived within me and that it was a grief to him whenever I glossed over a verse. I needed men as fallible as Eli to teach me how to respond to God's voice.
I thank God for my own mentor who taught us that it was impossible for the King James Bible to disagree with God in any point. It is as holy and as accurate at God. There is nothing that God wants men to know that is not contained in its pages. There is simply nothing of the revelation of God that can ever be made more clear than how a King James Bible states it. When God teaches individual men through the experiences of their life both through chastisement or through blessings, it is only by the words of a King James Bible that they can understand and appropriate those lessons.
I know that some of my readers are not there yet. Those above statements made them a little nervous and a little worried that perhaps we are carrying this thing too far. Nevertheless, I'm glad that you have taken steps that should inevitably bring you there. If by some means, the Lord could gather each and every original manuscript just as they were when they left the authors' hands, and the Lord himself gave you the ability to read and converse in those languages as well as you can read and converse in English, would you be troubled by those statements? After all, it is God's word.
Eventually, the Lord seeks to bring every believer past those barriers of doubt that men have erected and to bring those same believers to understand that every single characteristic attributed to scripture is perfectly fulfilled with a King James Bible. There is simply nothing that a reconstruction of all the originals in a perfect manner could offer that the King James Bible does not offer.
Imagine praising a friend or an old teacher but when you are done, you warn people to take their word with a grain of salt. Why praise that person at all? A man is no better than his word. That is the great irony to the mega churches of fervently swaying and hand waving worshipers who feel so uplifted as they praise God. What praise is it to God to call him great but cast doubt on his word? You wouldn't praise anyone you know that way. What fools the devil has made out of so much of professing Christianity!
The riches of Christ are unsearchable (Ephesians 3:8). That doesn't mean that men cannot search the riches of Christ. It means that men will never exhaust them. There will not be a time even in the ages to come where a man will finally say, "I now know it all." As infinite as eternity, as infinite as endless space, and as infinite as Jesus Christ saying, I am alive for evermore, Revelation 1:18; so will be the knowledge of Christ. And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know, I Corinthians 8:2. As long as eternity lasts, a person with salvation will search those unsearchable riches of Christ. That is true joy.
That is meant to start on this earth. In a believer's early days, he needs to build a basic structure of doctrine. God in his grace has given the believer men who can help in this process. Be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines. For it is a good thing that the heart be established with grace; not with meats, which have not profited them that have been occupied therein, Hebrews 13:9. Seek out those men who understand the bible structure of the New Testament Church. Watch their lives. Have they profited by what they teach? Obviously I'm not speaking of large bank accounts. Has the grace of God been obvious in this person's life, in family, in church, in public behavior, and has it proven capable of bringing them through tragedy?
Find such men and make sure that their words are the words of a King James Bible. If they build a doctrinal structure that contradicts the plain sense of bible, find someone else. Like an old house still being inhabited by men, your doctrinal structure will need constant work. Periodically, I am ashamed when I finally understand a verse that has long puzzled me. I realize that my doctrine needs tweaking. I'm not talking about abandoning things like the deity of Jesus Christ, but many times I have sat back in awe as I realized that the deity of Jesus Christ is far greater and more majestic than anything that I had ever thought before.
I never want that process to stop. I want to read a verse, examine it its context, and then see how it applies to my overall understanding of God and his works. I do not want to settle on what I think until my conscience is completely settled that I have taken the verse exactly as written, and that I have been obedient to any prick from the Spirit of God as to how I have applied that verse.
I am in complete harmony with the great bulk of King James Bible defenders who seek to make the truth known and who endlessly battle the lies and misunderstandings about it. I know that many of these people are not at the same place that I am in my work of understanding God. I should hope that many are far past me. What each defender wants is to create a playing field where any man woman or child can have perfect access to the truth, and then in the liberty of their conscience, discover what God wants them to know. In this we are united. The King James Bible is the word of God.
I truly sorrow for any man who has his doctrine all worked out because someone gave him a catechism with bible verses to back up each major point. There are some among the King James Bible believers who have little more than that. Nevertheless, they hold in their hands the absolute truth. I rejoice in that. As a Baptist, I will lay down my life for that man's right to interpret that bible however he sees fit. As a Baptist, I will also exhort men to leave the worn out theologies of Protestantism and their preconceived doctrines and to step into the glorious liberty of a true bible believer. Become a doctrinal bible believer, not just an historical bible believer.
|
|
"I was almost in all evil in the midst of the congregation and assembly."
Based on the book of Proverbs, The Red Herring deals with
one of the greatest issues among Christians today.
Pastors, fathers, and families struggle every day
to spiritually survive as they fight to walk with God
while they are continually being hunted by
what Proverbs calls “The Strange Woman"
|
|
https://fb.watch/bYnJGGB6OG/
"I was almost in all evil in the midst of the congregation and assembly."
·
A gripping look into the hearts of men.
Watch Shiloh Films newest release The Red Herring, available now!
Based on the book of Proverbs, this relevant message is for Men & Churches today.
Based on the book of Proverbs, The Red Herring deals with
one of the greatest issues among Christians today.
Pastors, fathers, and families struggle every day
to spiritually survive as they fight to walk with God
while they are continually being hunted by
what Proverbs calls “The Strange Woman"
THE RED HERRING
Proverbs 1:7 (KJV) The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.
Proverbs 4:18 (KJV) But the path of the just is as the shining light, that shineth more and more unto the perfect day.
Proverbs 4:23 (KJV) Keep thy heart with all diligence; for out of it are the issues of life.
Proverbs 5:11 (KJV) And thou mourn at the last, when thy flesh and thy body are consumed,
Proverbs 5:14 (KJV) I was almost in all evil in the midst of the congregation and assembly.
Proverbs 7:6-7 (KJV) For at the window of my house I looked through my casement, And beheld among the simple ones, I discerned among the youths, a young man void of understanding,
Proverbs 7:26 (KJV) For she hath cast down many wounded: yea, many strong men have been slain by her.
Proverbs 7:1-27 (KJV) My son, keep my words, and lay up my commandments with thee. Keep my commandments, and live; and my law as the apple of thine eye. Bind them upon thy fingers, write them upon the table of thine heart. Say unto wisdom, Thou art my sister; and call understanding thy kinswoman: That they may keep thee from the strange woman, from the stranger which flattereth with her words. For at the window of my house I looked through my casement, And beheld among the simple ones, I discerned among the youths, a young man void of understanding, Passing through the street near her corner; and he went the way to her house, In the twilight, in the evening, in the black and dark night: And, behold, there met him a woman with the attire of an harlot, and subtil of heart. (She is loud and stubborn; her feet abide not in her house: Now is she without, now in the streets, and lieth in wait at every corner.) So she caught him, and kissed him, and with an impudent face said unto him, I have peace offerings with me; this day have I payed my vows. Therefore came I forth to meet thee, diligently to seek thy face, and I have found thee. I have decked my bed with coverings of tapestry, with carved works, with fine linen of Egypt. I have perfumed my bed with myrrh, aloes, and cinnamon. Come, let us take our fill of love until the morning: let us solace ourselves with loves. For the goodman is not at home, he is gone a long journey: He hath taken a bag of money with him, and will come home at the day appointed. With her much fair speech she caused him to yield, with the flattering of her lips she forced him. He goeth after her straightway, as an ox goeth to the slaughter, or as a fool to the correction of the stocks; Till a dart strike through his liver; as a bird hasteth to the snare, and knoweth not that it is for his life. Hearken unto me now therefore, O ye children, and attend to the words of my mouth. Let not thine heart decline to her ways, go not astray in her paths. For she hath cast down many wounded: yea, many strong men have been slain by her. Her house is the way to hell, going down to the chambers of death.
Sermon Aug 2018
|
|
02/22/2022 >>> (W22) UPDATE TO THE BIG PICTURE to work
with the existing Groups & Pages only better!
We welcome you! to "SEE THE BIG PICTURE"
REMEMBER... WE ALSO ARE WARNING ABOUT
'BAPTIST CHURCH HISTORY'
THAT IS NOT THE TRUTH.
Type or copy/paste into your browser for
a ton of SEARCHBLE INFORMATION!
|
|
THESE WEBSITES ARE BLOCKED BY
FB AND MESSENGER
|
|
|
|
"Come and feast, food to fill your Soul!" Randall Wandell
|
|
|
|
|
FULFILLING THE GREAT COMMISSION
NEW RESEARCH ADDITION
Introducing “English for Bible Readers”
AND
|
|
|
THIS EMAIL CONTAINS AN EXTENSIVE COLLECTION OF IDEAS AND INFORMATION LIKE MANY HAVE BEEN LOOKING FOR!
SEE HOW BELOW >>> TO HAVE SEVERAL OF THE BEST POSTS FROM DOZENS OF GOOD INFORMATION SOURCES EVERY DAY!
More Good Information >>> Focusing Education on the
King James Bible – A STATEMENT OF PRINCIPAL and
Exploding the Myth of the Greek
|
|
|
|
SEE SEVERAL OF THE
BEST POSTS FROM
and
|
|
|
SEE SEVERAL OF THE BEST POSTS FROM
DOZENS OF GOOD INFORMATION
SOURCES EVERY DAY!
|
|
Sign up to Stay in Touch with All Five Groups as they become LEARNING BIBLICAL TRUTH! - GOD'S TRUTH!
When you sign up for our mailing list, you will be able to ... "Stay tuned" for news and updates delivered straight to your inbox. Here you will find many different subjects with information and resources for your learning/teaching needs! WE WANT TO WELCOME YOU TODAY! TO: A WARNING MINISTRY and BAPTIST CHURCH HISTORY and Watch Ministry False Teaching Exposed Based on the Authorized KJB and Warnings about Unbiblical Interpretation of Bible Prophecy and Warnings about Unbiblical Interpretation of Bible Prophecy and Israel will become >>> one platform "LEARNING BIBLICAL TRUTH! - GOD'S TRUTH!"
|
|
(W13) NEW FB 'PAGE' Just Launched to work with the
existing FB Group only better! We welcome you!
"SEE THE BIG PICTURE"
|
|
ALSO - MORE GOOD UPDATED RESOURCES HERE,TOO!
(C13) CHURCH REASOURCES >>> WITH NEW INFORMATION! SOME MORE OF MY FAVORITE RESOURCES IN A NUTSHELL! compiled by Roger Fulk UDATED 11/21/21
|
|
ENJOY PREVIOUSLY POSTED INFORMATION BELOW!
LIKE A COMPLETE WEBSITE OF ARTICLES,
INFORMTION LINKS AND MUCH MORE!
INSTANTLY SEE WHAT WE ARE CURRENTLY
WORKING ON - OF OUR MANY PROJECTS...
SOMETIMES EVEN BEFORE IT IS PUBLISHED!
INCLUDING SOME OF OUR RESEARCH.
YOUR IDEAS AND COMMENTS
ARE WELCOME! circa 10/29/21
GIVE ME AT LEAST 36 HOURS TO RESPOND ...
Thank you,
|
|
NEW SERIES ... LONG OVER DUE!
Behold, the days come, saith the Lord GOD, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the LORD: Amos 8:11.
There has been a 50 year push in most Evangelical or Fundamental churches to tell as many people as possible about Jesus Christ. At the end of that 50 year push, far fewer people know or understand Jesus Christ than ever before. Regardless of anyone else's theology, I have found that explaining to people that God's word is here on this earth, that it is perfect and that they can know it has done more to awaken people to righteousness than anything else.
Booker T. Washington once said that he wearied of young ex-slaves who had been sent off to Europe for a fancy education by wealthy do-gooders. He said they could dress fancy and discourse for hours on the various interest rates of European bonds and stocks but couldn't understand why their fathers lost a dollar on every bale of cotton they sold. Our bible colleges and local church institutes have spewed forth their modern equivalent in the ministry.
We have young men who dress right, preach well, and have very fundamental theologies. They cannot get a neighborhood to change. They can't get a family to change and they can't get an individual to change. They are utterly impotent. Their idea of soul winning is the Baptist Sacrament wherein they get people to pray their little prayer and pretend that these people truly believed.
What do tadpoles become? If you said, "frogs" you are about .001% right. Most tadpoles become fish food. Very few ever become frogs. What do these hapless victims of the Baptist Sacrament become? If you said, "saints of God" you are less accurate than your first answer. Our towns and cities all over America are filled with people who have been run through the mill of easy believism only to blend back into the sin laden lifestyles wherein the preacher found them.
The Black Creek Baptist Church is in Allegany County New York which lost 5% of its population in the last census and is down to 46,456 people. Most industry has moved out. Our township which is quite large has 700 people. A good portion of them are Amish who would never come to one of our services. In 14 years we have gone from an average attendance of 15 to 25 to an average of 60 to 80. We have drawn many people from broken drug sotted homes who had fallen through every safety net. Many of their lives are irrevocably changed. Doctors have noticed, social workers have noticed and the men who stock beer in the convenience stores have noticed.
My emphasis to the broken victims of New York State's overworked welfare system and the broken families and discouraged population is that there is a bible. It is the King James Bible. God speaks to us. We have the absolute, 100% true words of the living God. I teach them to read it. I teach them to apply it to their lives. As their lives improve, they begin to realize that the bible they are reading is indeed true. At some point they begin to tremble over the sin in their lives and become soundly converted by Jesus Christ.
I am no longer interested in debating the "theologically pure" who are quite sure that my ways are wrong. I just intend to teach a lost a dying world that the King James Bible is the word of God and that it is infallible and that they themselves can know what it says. The people who have received that teaching can't get enough church. They come for Sunday School, two services on Sunday, Wednesday Night, and they come to Thursday Night Bible Study. I hear complaints that we don't have enough meetings. My church is filled with actual converts as well as some who have drifted from other churches.
With all of that said, I am developing a bible institute degree to teach the King James Bible itself. I want them to know its vocabulary, its history, the history of England and of the English Language. I want them to be familiar with the various arguments for and against it. I want them to be sound in presenting the word of God, defending the word of God and then, and only then, preaching the word of God. If a man does that, Jesus Christ will be glorified and lives will change.
Here is a representative course that we are offering. If you want to take the course on your own, please feel free to do so. For this course we are using Will Kinney's website which he has graciously made available to the world at large. He is not associated with us, but we are indebted to him.
Brand Plucked Web: The Essential Will Kinney
Course Description:
This course will familiarize the student with the writings and research of Will Kinney. His website, Brandplucked.webs.com is probably the largest and most comprehensive compilation of defenses and explanations for the integrity of the King James Bible. As long as the internet continues in its current form, most challenges to the King James Bible whether they be historical, doctrinal, or linguistic can be successfully researched on Mr. Kinney’s site. The goal of this course is to make the student able use this site when researching difficult questions concerning our King James Bible.
Requirements:
1. Watch the first video under the heading; KJB Videos titled, Did God preserve His Inerrant words and are they found in the. King James Bible.
A. What are the four positions outlined by Will Kinney as the only four possible positions concerning the preservation of the word of God? List them and give a brief explanation of each position.
B. Considering position #4, explain in detail how Mr. Kinney helped you understand the position of an inerrant King James Bible.
C. Take one of the other 3 positions and refute it in more detail using your own words as if you were defending the King James Bible from a person who held that position.
2. Read the Article, Reasons why the King James Bible is the absolute Standard- God’s Historic Witness to the Truth.
A. Write a 500 words or more essay summarizing Mr. Kinney’s reasoning.
3. Read the Article, The Old Fashioned language of the King James Bible, subtitled, The “Old Fashioned Language” of the King James Bible “Archaic and Inerrant” beats “Modernized and Wrong Any Day of the Week.
A. Read the link on the 40 concrete examples of falsehoods taught by these fake bible versions. Choose 5 of them and explain why they are so dangerous.
4. Under the Heading KJB Videos, select 25 of the videos. Watch each of the 25 and summarize each video.
5. Using Google, type in a verse from scripture and then write Brandplucked after it. Briefly write what you found.
6. Write a final paper on how Will Kinney has helped you to appreciate the King James Bible. In that paper explain how his refutation of false versions helped as well as his explanations about the truth of the King James Bible. Minimum 1000 words.
|
|
THE FOLLOWING ARE PREVIOUSLY
PUBLISHED POSTS FOR YOUR EDIFICATION
|
|
Matthew 7:13-14 KJV By Bill Brinkworth
Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: 14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.” Matthew 7:13-14 KJV
There are many that claim to be Christian, but are not! They are heathen. Heathen are the unsaved, and those bound for Hell. Calling themselves Christians will not make them saved. Examine what the Bible says about heathen cloaked under the name “Christian”:
- Heathens are sometimes called Christians or God’s people.
- “… That they may possess the remnant of Edom, and of all the heathen, which are called by my name, saith the LORD that doeth this.” Amos 9:11-12
- This verse is speaking of a time not yet come, but the principle applies to these latter days. Not all that claim to be children of God are children of God
- Heathens pray.
- “… But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.” Matthew 6:6-7
- It is ironic that the outline for prayer (Matthew 6:9-13) that follows these verses is what many so-called “Christian” faiths vainly (without thought or meaning, empty of feeling) pray over and over.
- Heathens have religion also!
- “… This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.” Matthew 15:7-9
- There have always been those that believe themselves to be children of God, but were not. It was the religious that had killed Jesus and persecuted His followers.
- Heathens can think God is using them. (However, many times Satan, the deceiver, is blinding them, and deceiving them with false miracles from “God”.)
- “Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. Not every one that saith unto me , Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.” Matthew 7:20-23
- Heathens can go through religious routines and rituals.
- “Then shall ye begin to say, We have eaten and drunk in thy presence, and thou hast taught in our streets. But he shall say, I tell you, I know you not whence ye are; depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity. There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth … and you thrust out.” Luke 13:26-28
- They went to the house of God, but that didn’t make them His.
Many are religious, but lost. People may think they are Christians, but may not be. There is only one way to be a child of God — God’s way.
“… Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” John 3:3.
Are you “born again”? Are you going to Heaven by God’s narrow way of trusting Christ’s payment for your sins with His blood? Or are you a heathen bound for Hell?
|
|
“Walk in wisdom toward them that are without, redeeming the time. ” Colossians 4:5 KJV
God said we are to walk in wisdom concerning the lost. Did you ever stop to think about it? That man, unsaved out there, is related to us about using our time. That is what God said, “…toward them that are without, … ” in order to reach them. Did you ever stop to think that a man out there puts a higher value on Christian living than he does about Christian doctrine? He never thinks much or wonders, “What do those people do over there at that Baptist church? But he thinks an awful lot about, “I wonder how those people at that Baptist church live?” This is uncanny about how unsaved people think of saved people.
The salvation of a man’s soul depends greatly upon what he thinks of you. You mark it down, not so much what he thinks of the Bible, or what he thinks of Jesus, or what he thinks of preaching. But the salvation of many a lost person depends on what he thinks of you and I as a Christian.
Our own estimation of your spiritual self, will determine what you do in the matter of time and witnessing to somebody else. I believe with all my heart, that a lot of people never witness or use their time to get someone saved, because of a poor estimation of their own spiritual life. God says, “Walk in wisdom toward them that are without, redeeming the time. ”
God has made us managers of time. — T.M.
Prepared by Roger Fulk, from the “Baptist Bread” August, 25, 2021 devotional by author Dr. Tom Malone (Deceased), Pontiac, MI. With permission from Tim Green, editor Baptist Bread.
One of the most important responsibilities Christians have is to study the Scriptures for themselves. Church is important, and one can learn quite a lot from the man of God in the pulpit, but it is up to us to study and understand what the Word of God says.
“Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” II Tim. 2:15
II Timothy 2:15 teaches us five things about studying the Word of God:
|
|
When you sign up for our mailing list, you will be able to ... "Stay tuned" for news and updates delivered straight to your inbox. Here you will find many different subjects with information and resources for your learning/teaching needs! WE WANT TO WELCOME YOU TODAY!
|
|
The purpose of this Blog is to teach about Jude 3
It has been said there is a big lack of 'WARNING MINISTRIES" in churches. This is a teaching resource to help people and churches understand more about Jude 3 and other related scriptures.
Read more
awarningministry.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
This Blog will teach about MANY SUBJECTS!
Here is an example! Another interesting question! And ... there are many more ... Just Stay 'Tuned'.
Read more
awarningministry.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
About The Author Roger Fulk |
This is another Blog Post and I hope you enjoy this! It's about a WOLF WATCH MINISTRY FALSE TEACHING EXPOSED!. Please stay tuned. We have plenty of excellent content! |
|
|
This subject may not be of interest to everyone, however we have found there is much confusion about it! We aim to help people learn about this subject for teaching and learning purposes! Keep coming back often and enjoy learning about many different subjects like this for your edification!
Thank you,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
